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 Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Photo quality - onto paper or onto CD?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 25th 04, 12:54 PM
Theseeker
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Photo quality - onto paper or onto CD?

I am about to buy a colour aerial photo of a sixty square mile area.
The firm supplying these charges more for the image on CD than it does
for a printed photograph. Don't ask me why, I've queried it and the
differential is vast. Obviously I am considering buying the printed
version, scanning it and saving it to CD for future
ehancement/enlargement. Will I lose any quality with this conversion?
I have a SCSI scanner and Photoshop so I am confident I could get
about 1440 dpi.
Would I be better off buying a negative and getting a professional to
digitize it?


  #2  
Old September 25th 04, 03:14 PM
Joseph Meehan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Theseeker wrote:
I am about to buy a colour aerial photo of a sixty square mile area.
The firm supplying these charges more for the image on CD than it does
for a printed photograph. Don't ask me why, I've queried it and the
differential is vast. Obviously I am considering buying the printed
version, scanning it and saving it to CD for future
ehancement/enlargement. Will I lose any quality with this conversion?
I have a SCSI scanner and Photoshop so I am confident I could get
about 1440 dpi.
Would I be better off buying a negative and getting a professional to
digitize it?


We don't know how much data is on the CD vs. how much may be on the
print. My guess is the CD contains more information than the print. BTW
what size is the print. An 8x10 is going to be able to hold far less
information than a 48x60.

--
Joseph E. Meehan

26 + 6 = 1 It's Irish Math



  #3  
Old September 25th 04, 03:14 PM
Joseph Meehan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Theseeker wrote:
I am about to buy a colour aerial photo of a sixty square mile area.
The firm supplying these charges more for the image on CD than it does
for a printed photograph. Don't ask me why, I've queried it and the
differential is vast. Obviously I am considering buying the printed
version, scanning it and saving it to CD for future
ehancement/enlargement. Will I lose any quality with this conversion?
I have a SCSI scanner and Photoshop so I am confident I could get
about 1440 dpi.
Would I be better off buying a negative and getting a professional to
digitize it?


We don't know how much data is on the CD vs. how much may be on the
print. My guess is the CD contains more information than the print. BTW
what size is the print. An 8x10 is going to be able to hold far less
information than a 48x60.

--
Joseph E. Meehan

26 + 6 = 1 It's Irish Math



  #4  
Old September 25th 04, 09:08 PM
Alan Browne
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Theseeker wrote:
I am about to buy a colour aerial photo of a sixty square mile area.
The firm supplying these charges more for the image on CD than it does
for a printed photograph. Don't ask me why, I've queried it and the
differential is vast. Obviously I am considering buying the printed
version, scanning it and saving it to CD for future
ehancement/enlargement. Will I lose any quality with this conversion?
I have a SCSI scanner and Photoshop so I am confident I could get
about 1440 dpi.
Would I be better off buying a negative and getting a professional to
digitize it?



What are the various technical parameters regarding the print and the CD image?
(Size, pixels x,y)

Do they say what size the negative(positive) is that covers that area?

Most prints yield about 400 dpi at best. (B&W aerial photography done on high
end cameras and repro equipment might go to 600 or so). So the larger the print
they sell, the better.

I'm curious: What is your use of the image going to be?

Cheers,
Alan

--
-- rec.photo.equipment.35mm user resource:
-- http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.--
  #5  
Old September 26th 04, 02:25 AM
PlaneGuy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Its simple as to why they charge more for the CD than the print - on the CD
you have a perfect copy of the image that you can make prints from (I assume
that the CD includes a licence to do that). On the print, you have bought a
print, and I presume NO LICENCE to reproduce the image - ie, by you scanning
and reprinting the image, you are breaching copyright. (* all legal
disclaimers apply)

If you were to by the negative, I guess that the price would be higher than
the CD alone.

"Theseeker" wrote in message
...
I am about to buy a colour aerial photo of a sixty square mile area.
The firm supplying these charges more for the image on CD than it does
for a printed photograph. Don't ask me why, I've queried it and the
differential is vast. Obviously I am considering buying the printed
version, scanning it and saving it to CD for future
ehancement/enlargement. Will I lose any quality with this conversion?
I have a SCSI scanner and Photoshop so I am confident I could get
about 1440 dpi.
Would I be better off buying a negative and getting a professional to
digitize it?




  #6  
Old September 26th 04, 02:25 AM
PlaneGuy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Its simple as to why they charge more for the CD than the print - on the CD
you have a perfect copy of the image that you can make prints from (I assume
that the CD includes a licence to do that). On the print, you have bought a
print, and I presume NO LICENCE to reproduce the image - ie, by you scanning
and reprinting the image, you are breaching copyright. (* all legal
disclaimers apply)

If you were to by the negative, I guess that the price would be higher than
the CD alone.

"Theseeker" wrote in message
...
I am about to buy a colour aerial photo of a sixty square mile area.
The firm supplying these charges more for the image on CD than it does
for a printed photograph. Don't ask me why, I've queried it and the
differential is vast. Obviously I am considering buying the printed
version, scanning it and saving it to CD for future
ehancement/enlargement. Will I lose any quality with this conversion?
I have a SCSI scanner and Photoshop so I am confident I could get
about 1440 dpi.
Would I be better off buying a negative and getting a professional to
digitize it?




  #7  
Old September 26th 04, 12:01 PM
BJ
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

What are the various technical parameters regarding the print and the CD image?
(Size, pixels x,y)

Do they say what size the negative(positive) is that covers that area?

Most prints yield about 400 dpi at best. (B&W aerial photography done on high
end cameras and repro equipment might go to 600 or so). So the larger the print
they sell, the better.

I'm curious: What is your use of the image going to be?

Cheers,
Alan


The print is color A3 size. This firm joins dozens of grid squares
together according to the land area required. I'll have to ask them
Monday the comparitive resolution of CD and print. I'll be reproducing
the view onto plastic for vacuum forming. Potential viewers will only
be seeing A3 size print, they will not be zooming in, unless they use
a magnifying glass!
  #8  
Old September 26th 04, 12:01 PM
BJ
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

What are the various technical parameters regarding the print and the CD image?
(Size, pixels x,y)

Do they say what size the negative(positive) is that covers that area?

Most prints yield about 400 dpi at best. (B&W aerial photography done on high
end cameras and repro equipment might go to 600 or so). So the larger the print
they sell, the better.

I'm curious: What is your use of the image going to be?

Cheers,
Alan


The print is color A3 size. This firm joins dozens of grid squares
together according to the land area required. I'll have to ask them
Monday the comparitive resolution of CD and print. I'll be reproducing
the view onto plastic for vacuum forming. Potential viewers will only
be seeing A3 size print, they will not be zooming in, unless they use
a magnifying glass!
  #9  
Old September 27th 04, 05:34 AM
BenOne©
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Theseeker wrote:
I am about to buy a colour aerial photo of a sixty square mile area.
The firm supplying these charges more for the image on CD than it does
for a printed photograph. Don't ask me why, I've queried it and the
differential is vast. Obviously I am considering buying the printed
version, scanning it and saving it to CD for future
ehancement/enlargement. Will I lose any quality with this conversion?
I have a SCSI scanner and Photoshop so I am confident I could get
about 1440 dpi.
Would I be better off buying a negative and getting a professional to
digitize it?



I believe you pay more for the "negative" because you are getting the source and
can make as many prints as you like. Most film photographers charge extra to
supply the film.

--
Ben Thomas
Opinions, conclusions, and other information in this message that do not
relate to the official business of my firm shall be understood as neither
given nor endorsed by it.

  #10  
Old September 27th 04, 05:34 AM
BenOne©
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Theseeker wrote:
I am about to buy a colour aerial photo of a sixty square mile area.
The firm supplying these charges more for the image on CD than it does
for a printed photograph. Don't ask me why, I've queried it and the
differential is vast. Obviously I am considering buying the printed
version, scanning it and saving it to CD for future
ehancement/enlargement. Will I lose any quality with this conversion?
I have a SCSI scanner and Photoshop so I am confident I could get
about 1440 dpi.
Would I be better off buying a negative and getting a professional to
digitize it?



I believe you pay more for the "negative" because you are getting the source and
can make as many prints as you like. Most film photographers charge extra to
supply the film.

--
Ben Thomas
Opinions, conclusions, and other information in this message that do not
relate to the official business of my firm shall be understood as neither
given nor endorsed by it.

 




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 Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Try DVD Photo Album version 3.01 to make digital photo album playable on TV with DVD player Michael Shaw Digital Photography 2 September 24th 04 10:10 AM
Kodak on Variable Film Development: NO! Michael Scarpitti In The Darkroom 276 August 12th 04 10:42 PM
fiber based photo paper Monkey Film & Labs 5 February 2nd 04 02:59 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:54 AM.


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.