A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Point & Shoot Cameras
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Newbie questions about camera settings



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old September 6th 06, 09:17 AM posted to comp.sys.mac.system,rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.point+shoot
Neil Ellwood
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 178
Default Newbie questions about camera settings

On Wed, 06 Sep 2006 04:10:50 +0000, Mr. T wrote:



Another newbie question:
What would you consider more important in a point and shoot camera? High mp,
high iso or a high quality lens?

It seems that everyone advertises their high mp cameras but say little about
the lens...

This is just my personal opinion. The most important ingredient is the
photographer, then the lens followed almost equally by high megapixels and
high iso.

--
Neil
Delete l to reply
  #22  
Old September 6th 06, 02:54 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.point+shoot
jeremy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 984
Default Newbie questions about camera settings

"Bill" wrote in message
news


And none of them look any better than 200ppi, which is all you really
need:



Have your eyes checked.


  #23  
Old September 6th 06, 08:11 PM posted to comp.sys.mac.system,rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.point+shoot
James Glidewell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2
Default Newbie questions about camera settings

Paul Rubin wrote:
"jeremy" writes:

And then, one day, we realize that the ONLY THINGS left to remind us of the
activities and milestones in our lives are those thin pieces of paper upon
which are printed the photos we took, or the CDs that contain the image
files. And that is when we look back and wish that we had bought the better
camera, with the better lens, and had made bigger prints, rather than those
drug store discounted ones.



What I've seen in those situations is that a low res print of Grandma
makes the viewer every bit as happy as a high res one does, as long as
the subject is identifiable.


That's my experience as well. I don't think that the difference between
a two megapixel image and a six megapixel image is going to make any
real difference in the sentimental value of the image.

What _will_ matter is if you have any images at all - please *back*
*up* your photos, folks... preferably with at least one copy offsite.

Although I do have to say that I think Jeremy would make an _excellent_
camera salesman. :-)
  #24  
Old September 6th 06, 09:58 PM posted to comp.sys.mac.system,rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.point+shoot
Frank ess
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,232
Default Newbie questions about camera settings

James Glidewell wrote:
Paul Rubin wrote:
"jeremy" writes:

And then, one day, we realize that the ONLY THINGS left to remind
us of the activities and milestones in our lives are those thin
pieces of paper upon which are printed the photos we took, or the
CDs that contain the image files. And that is when we look back
and wish that we had bought the better camera, with the better
lens, and had made bigger prints, rather than those drug store
discounted ones.



What I've seen in those situations is that a low res print of
Grandma
makes the viewer every bit as happy as a high res one does, as long
as the subject is identifiable.


That's my experience as well. I don't think that the difference
between a two megapixel image and a six megapixel image is going to
make any real difference in the sentimental value of the image.

What _will_ matter is if you have any images at all - please *back*
*up* your photos, folks... preferably with at least one copy
offsite.


Yes, that too.

Here's a little metaphor:
the first photo is the whole thing, shot in about 1938 on 116 film in
a Kodak "Autographic";
next two are crops.

http://www.fototime.com/5E21E09C4043371/orig.jpg
http://www.fototime.com/4E0721419FCB4A2/orig.jpg
http://www.fototime.com/EAD91185898D0A3/orig.jpg

The print from which the scan was made is a contact print, the
original somewhat smaller than the whole-thing as it shows up on my
1024x768 lcd monitor.

Can you imagine getting such nice, independent images from an
Instamatic print? not likely. Because the original was of a nature to
allow maintenance of detail and tone, it was relatively easy to
extract something of sentimental value, and a little more, I think.

As a comparison, here's one from an Instamatic print.
http://www.fototime.com/2C71B7806D3648B/orig.jpg

So it is with digital: always get as much information as you can;
somewhere down the line someone may benefit in ways you couldn't
imagine.

--
Frank ess

  #25  
Old September 6th 06, 10:09 PM posted to comp.sys.mac.system,rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.point+shoot
Frank ess
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,232
Default Newbie questions about camera settings

Frank ess wrote:

That's my experience as well. I don't think that the difference
between a two megapixel image and a six megapixel image is going to
make any real difference in the sentimental value of the image.

What _will_ matter is if you have any images at all - please *back*
*up* your photos, folks... preferably with at least one copy
offsite.


Yes, that too.

Here's a little metaphor:
the first photo is the whole thing, shot in about 1938 on 116 film
in
a Kodak "Autographic";
next two are crops.

http://www.fototime.com/5E21E09C4043371/orig.jpg
http://www.fototime.com/4E0721419FCB4A2/orig.jpg
http://www.fototime.com/EAD91185898D0A3/orig.jpg

The print from which the scan was made is a contact print, the
original somewhat smaller than the whole-thing as it shows up on my
1024x768 lcd monitor.


ACK! 1280x1024. Sheesh.

Can you imagine getting such nice, independent images from an
Instamatic print? not likely. Because the original was of a nature
to
allow maintenance of detail and tone, it was relatively easy to
extract something of sentimental value, and a little more, I think.

As a comparison, here's one from an Instamatic print.
http://www.fototime.com/2C71B7806D3648B/orig.jpg

So it is with digital: always get as much information as you can;
somewhere down the line someone may benefit in ways you couldn't
imagine.



  #26  
Old September 19th 06, 12:09 AM posted to comp.sys.mac.system,rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.point+shoot
The PhAnToM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2
Default Newbie questions about camera settings


jeremy wrote:


That is why I say, if you own a camera, don't let it gather dust on a shelf.
Use it. Don't worry if the exposure is not spot on, or if you weren't
paying attention and didn't hold the camera exactly level. Just shoot
photos. Lots of them. And distribute them.


Some photos that I take with my point-and-shoot that I consider
sub-par, my friends think are really cool or interesting. The best
camera in the world is no subsitute for subject and composition. If it
gives someone else pleasure, then: mission accomplished.

  #27  
Old September 21st 06, 06:29 AM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.point+shoot
Randy Berbaum
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 214
Default Newbie questions about camera settings

In rec.photo.digital The PhAnToM wrote:

: jeremy wrote:

:
: That is why I say, if you own a camera, don't let it gather dust on a
: shelf. Use it. Don't worry if the exposure is not spot on, or if you
: weren't paying attention and didn't hold the camera exactly level.
: Just shoot photos. Lots of them. And distribute them.

: Some photos that I take with my point-and-shoot that I consider
: sub-par, my friends think are really cool or interesting. The best
: camera in the world is no subsitute for subject and composition. If it
: gives someone else pleasure, then: mission accomplished.

I agree. You always notice the tiny "faults" that your friends will
rarely ever even see. But I also agree that the camera should not sit on
the shelf and hope that when you want to take a picture it will magically
be perfect. Play with the camera. Turn every dial, and reset every
setting. What happens when you set this setting (whichever setting you are
currently looking at) to the extreme. True most of the resulting images
will be impossible, but you not only learn what is not possible but what
did work when you hadn't expected it. Some unexpected results need to be
filed away in your memory (or even written down) for future use. When you
find yourself in an odd situation, some of these "failures" from the past
may give you the idea that allows you turn an impossible shot into
accolades.

The same goes for your editing software.

Exploring can sometimes open whole new realms of exploration. For example.
Why would anyone want to set their camera to take a 30 second exposure
outdoors on a sunny day? But when you do this, anything that does not move
(like a building) will be clean and clear, but anything that moves (like
pedestrians) will blur. If the blur is enough, the blurred object may
entirely disappear. So by exploring the limits and beyond you may find
something that you can use in the future.

Randy

==========
Randy Berbaum
Champaign, IL

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
MACRO SHOTS QUESTION [email protected] Digital Photography 46 July 10th 06 02:44 PM
The f/ratio myth and camera size Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark) Digital Photography 55 February 9th 06 04:04 AM
How to Buy a Digital Camera [email protected] Digital Photography 6 January 18th 05 11:01 PM
How to Buy a Digital Camera [email protected] Digital Photography 0 January 18th 05 04:39 PM
olympus stylus 300/400 basic operation questions on digital camera inetquestion Digital Photo Equipment For Sale 1 September 4th 03 12:54 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:21 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.