Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: DX4900 query for John Pytlak.

This is topic DX4900 query for John Pytlak. in forum Film-Yak at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=001805

Posted by John Spooner (Member # 1565) on 02-23-2003, 08:52 AM:

Dear John,
In your professional opinion, what would be the best setting for making 8x10 prints. The 2.2 megapixel or the 4 megapixel high compression setting, seeing the file size is almost the same for either.
Regards. John Spooner.

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 02-23-2003, 10:45 AM:

I'm not John but I believe the compressed file from the 4M image contains more usable data than the similarly sized 2M uncompressed file and ought to produce the better picture, unless there is some aspect of the particular picture that is being particularly degraded by the compression algorithim.

Since you're talking about different settings on the same 4M camera why not lock the camera down on a tripod and take a few sample photos at both settings, dump them to your computer and upsize the smaller image to the same pixel dimensions as the larger using Photoshop or similar software? Then pick an area of high detail and zoom your view into great enlargement on both versions and compare them side by side. Surely there will be more detail in the large image, despite it having been compressed and decompressed.

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 02-23-2003, 01:18 PM:

The camera uses lossy JPEG compression, so it's never really uncompressed. However, the Kodak DX series cameras (actually most, if not all of their cameras) are pretty good about JPEG compression. You'll see the filesize increase drastically for images that 'have a lot of different stuff & colour'. So you'd probably be best using the 4MP High Compression.

Of course you'd be best to buy yourself a larger memory card. They are cheap compared to what you would have paid for that camera.

Editing the subject title so that you spell John's last name correctly might get a faster response too. [Smile]

[ 02-23-2003, 05:16 PM: Message edited by: Daryl C. W. O'Shea ]

Posted by John Spooner (Member # 1565) on 02-24-2003, 08:08 AM:

Dear Steve and Daryl.
Thank you for your interest in this matter and for information supplied.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 02-25-2003, 03:01 PM:

In general, the more data the better. Compression artifacts are scene-dependent. For 8x10 inch prints, I'd go for the 4 megapixel setting.

Posted by John Spooner (Member # 1565) on 02-27-2003, 11:49 AM:

Dear John, thank you for your reply. The definition on the 4900 is exceptional, I am currently using the 4mp (high comp) setting as per advice received.
Thank you to yourself,Steve and Daryl.
John Spooner.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 02-27-2003, 02:12 PM:

Information about digital photography:

http://www.kodak.com/US/en/digital/dlc/index.jhtml

http://www.kodak.com/global/en/service/products/index.jhtml

http://www.kodak.com/eknec/PageQuerier.jhtml