How many mega pixels?

Crownfield wrote in message ...
Gene Palmiter wrote:

The Fuji plays math tricks too

but it does 6 mp without tricks, 12 mp with tricks.

That is, 6 million monochrome pixels, not 6 million full color pixels.

Tricky.

Crownfield wrote in message ...
Gene Palmiter wrote:

The Fuji plays math tricks too

but it does 6 mp without tricks, 12 mp with tricks.

That is, 6 million monochrome pixels, not 6 million full color pixels.

Tricky.

"Ron Hunter" wrote in message
...
[]
Just multiply each side by 300. That would be 9000x6000, and then
multiply those sides together. That's about 54 mp. Maybe you better
wait a while.

That gives you the maximum number of pixels in the image, it does not give
you the number of pixels required to represent the image any particular
degree of accuracy. Whilst I don't have a DSLR myself, I am prepared to
believe those who say that images taken with 5 - 10MP sensors are about
the same quality as film on typical subjects (while noting that the MTF
and noise spectrum characteristics of each are substantially
different....).

Cheers,
David

Thanks everyone for your feedback, I really don't know that much about
digital so your responses give me a lot to think about and put me that much
closer to making an informed decision. I do like the idea of renting a
digital camera for a weekend, that would be a great way for me to see the
difference with my own eyes.

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Babbling Brook Photography
Quality Framed Photography of
the Great Outdoors.
30 Day Money Back Guarantee!
http://www.babblingbrookphotography.com
Email

"Babbling Brook Photography" wrote
in message ...
I have yet to make the leap to digital, but someday I suppose I'll join
the
crowd. My question is how many mega pixels do I need to get a professional
quality 20" x 30" picture that is equivalent to a fine grained film?

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Babbling Brook Photography
Quality Framed Photography of
the Great Outdoors.
30 Day Money Back Guarantee!
http://www.babblingbrookphotography.com
Email

In message ,
(Georgette Preddy) wrote:

Crownfield wrote in message ...
Gene Palmiter wrote:

The Fuji plays math tricks too

but it does 6 mp without tricks, 12 mp with tricks.

That is, 6 million monochrome pixels, not 6 million full color pixels.

Tricky.

Not in terms of visual resolution. Color resolution is not visual
resolution.
--


John P Sheehy

Georgette Preddy wrote:

Crownfield wrote in message ...
Gene Palmiter wrote:

The Fuji plays math tricks too

but it does 6 mp without tricks, 12 mp with tricks.

That is, 6 million monochrome pixels, not 6 million full color pixels.

Tricky.

6 million unique x/yu locations, spatially distributed,
and consistent color by consistent bayer filters.

foveon keeps trying to calculate the colors,
and has always less pixels than all the other mfgs,

a mere 3 mp.

Note: as far as the "naked eye" is concerned (whatever that may be), there
is no desperate need for an exorbitant amount of pixels, unless one is
blowing up a tiny fragamnt of the photo. I have made 20 by 30" prints with a
2.3meg Camedia. ( Using TIFF). I can see no jaggies, and can, on close
inspection, see subtle gradations in nose hairs.
I made a living for many years as a theater and portrait photographer, using
100 and 200 speed film-- the 2.3meg camera beats them all.
rjf

"Babbling Brook Photography" wrote
in message ...
Thanks everyone for your feedback, I really don't know that much about
digital so your responses give me a lot to think about and put me that
much
closer to making an informed decision. I do like the idea of renting a
digital camera for a weekend, that would be a great way for me to see the
difference with my own eyes.

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Babbling Brook Photography
Quality Framed Photography of
the Great Outdoors.
30 Day Money Back Guarantee!
http://www.babblingbrookphotography.com
Email

"Babbling Brook Photography"
wrote
in message ...
I have yet to make the leap to digital, but someday I suppose I'll join
the
crowd. My question is how many mega pixels do I need to get a
professional
quality 20" x 30" picture that is equivalent to a fine grained film?

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Babbling Brook Photography
Quality Framed Photography of
the Great Outdoors.
30 Day Money Back Guarantee!
http://www.babblingbrookphotography.com
Email

"David J Taylor" wrote in
message ...
"Ron Hunter" wrote in message
...
[]
Just multiply each side by 300. That would be 9000x6000, and then
multiply those sides together. That's about 54 mp. Maybe you better
wait a while.

That gives you the maximum number of pixels in the image, it does not give
you the number of pixels required to represent the image any particular
degree of accuracy. Whilst I don't have a DSLR myself, I am prepared to
believe those who say that images taken with 5 - 10MP sensors are about
the same quality as film on typical subjects (while noting that the MTF
and noise spectrum characteristics of each are substantially
different....).

Cheers,
David



Dave, you've opened the door to better understanding the digital format. I
agree with you, it's not just the number of pixels that produces a high
quality photo, there are numerous other factors to contend with.

nick

Georgette Preddy wrote:
Crownfield wrote in message ...
Gene Palmiter wrote:

The Fuji plays math tricks too

but it does 6 mp without tricks, 12 mp with tricks.

That is, 6 million monochrome pixels, not 6 million full color pixels.

'Cause everybody can see that cameras like the Canon 10D and the Nikon D70
don't produce color images. Only monochrome imanges.

--
Ray Fischer

In article YemDc.121448$Sw.63512@attbi_s51,
Bob Fusillo wrote:
Note: as far as the "naked eye" is concerned (whatever that may be), there
is no desperate need for an exorbitant amount of pixels, unless one is
blowing up a tiny fragamnt of the photo. I have made 20 by 30" prints with a
2.3meg Camedia. ( Using TIFF). I can see no jaggies, and can, on close
inspection, see subtle gradations in nose hairs.
I made a living for many years as a theater and portrait photographer, using
100 and 200 speed film-- the 2.3meg camera beats them all.
rjf

You must have been doing something wrong with your film cameras all those
years. W.r.t. resolution, a 2.3 Mpixel camera doesn't come close to ISO 100
film. (Unless of course, you are taking all your portrets with a soft-focus
filter).



--
The Electronic Monk was a labor-saving device, like a dishwasher or a video
recorder. [...] Video recorders watched tedious television for you, thus saving
you the bother of looking at it yourself; Electronic Monks believed things for
you, [...] -- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency