Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Choosing resolution

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
June 8, 2005 5:36:17 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Am I missing something or is it a complete and total no brainer to
shoot my pictures at 1 megapixel as long as I can change them to a
higher resolution if and when I want it.....

Also I realize I need to do a lot more practice shooting but does
anyone have any tips shooting flash pictures and get the picture I
actually framed .....I have and I imagine most cameras have a lag
between the pressing of the shutter and the actual picture
snapped......I may have even noticed some of this without the flash
but it seems to be more of a lag with the flash.......for instance my
cat playing with something or I am shooting him doing something
devilish and I end up with his ass running down the hall instead of
his dubious deed.......

Thanks in advance....

Brad

LIFE'S JOURNEY IS NOT TO ARRIVE AT THE GRAVE SAFELY IN A
WELL-PRESERVED BODY, BUT RATHER TO SKID IN SIDEWAYS, TOTALLY WORN OUT,
SHOUTING... " HOLY @#$%... WHAT A RIDE!"

More about : choosing resolution

Anonymous
June 8, 2005 5:36:18 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Brad" <bjdbradnospam@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:2fica115e320r61cfop759sprbpcv36sco@4ax.com...
>
>
> Am I missing something or is it a complete and total no brainer to
> shoot my pictures at 1 megapixel as long as I can change them to a
> higher resolution if and when I want it.....
>
> Also I realize I need to do a lot more practice shooting but does
> anyone have any tips shooting flash pictures and get the picture I
> actually framed .....I have and I imagine most cameras have a lag
> between the pressing of the shutter and the actual picture
> snapped......I may have even noticed some of this without the flash
> but it seems to be more of a lag with the flash.......for instance my
> cat playing with something or I am shooting him doing something
> devilish and I end up with his ass running down the hall instead of
> his dubious deed.......
>
> Thanks in advance....
>
> Brad
>

What was the question again?
Anonymous
June 8, 2005 5:36:18 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Brad wrote:
> Am I missing something or is it a complete and total no brainer to
> shoot my pictures at 1 megapixel as long as I can change them to a
> higher resolution if and when I want it.....
>
> Also I realize I need to do a lot more practice shooting but does
> anyone have any tips shooting flash pictures and get the picture I
> actually framed .....I have and I imagine most cameras have a lag
> between the pressing of the shutter and the actual picture
> snapped......I may have even noticed some of this without the flash
> but it seems to be more of a lag with the flash.......for instance my
> cat playing with something or I am shooting him doing something
> devilish and I end up with his ass running down the hall instead of
> his dubious deed.......
>
I might not be understanding you fully but I believe you are saying
that you believe you can shoot a photos at 1 megapixel and then change
that photos to a higher resolution at a later date. You can't shoot at
a lower resolution and then change it to a higher resolution and not
get a blurry photo. If you could simply change to a higher resolution
latter then why not shot just one pixel and change it latter. In
general it is best to shot at the highest resolution your camera
supports, then down sample if you want a photos with less pixels.

Scott
Related resources
Anonymous
June 8, 2005 5:36:18 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Always, always, ALWAYS shoot at the highest resolution your camera is
capable of. There is no reason to pay for 5 megapixels of resolution (say)
only to then just shoot at 1 megapixel. I mean, I recently got a 2 megapixel
for everyday purposes and only paid $25 for it. A Canon Powershot A20. Why
spend $250 or so on more resolution if you're not going to use it?

LRH
Anonymous
June 8, 2005 5:36:18 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Wed, 08 Jun 2005 01:36:17 GMT, Brad wrote:

> Also I realize I need to do a lot more practice shooting but does
> anyone have any tips shooting flash pictures and get the picture I
> actually framed .....I have and I imagine most cameras have a lag
> between the pressing of the shutter and the actual picture
> snapped......I may have even noticed some of this without the flash
> but it seems to be more of a lag with the flash.......for instance my
> cat playing with something or I am shooting him doing something
> devilish and I end up with his ass running down the hall instead of
> his dubious deed.......

Two things that could spook the cat - AF lamps and anti-redeye
preflashes. More likely the latter, since if the AF caused the cat
to flee, you'd probably notice it long before finally activating the
shutter. If your camera allows you to disable anti-redeye flashes,
do so. Then pre-focus your shots by using the standard method
(depress the shutter half-way). When you finally take the picture
by depressing the shutter the rest of the way, even if there's some
pre-flash clicking noise noticeable by the cat, there shouldn't be
enough of a time lag to mess up the shot.
Anonymous
June 8, 2005 5:36:18 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Brad" <bjdbradnospam@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:2fica115e320r61cfop759sprbpcv36sco@4ax.com...
>
>
> Am I missing something or is it a complete and total no brainer to
> shoot my pictures at 1 megapixel as long as I can change them to a
> higher resolution if and when I want it.....
>
> Also I realize I need to do a lot more practice shooting but does
> anyone have any tips shooting flash pictures and get the picture I
> actually framed .....I have and I imagine most cameras have a lag
> between the pressing of the shutter and the actual picture
> snapped......I may have even noticed some of this without the flash
> but it seems to be more of a lag with the flash.......for instance my
> cat playing with something or I am shooting him doing something
> devilish and I end up with his ass running down the hall instead of
> his dubious deed.......
>
> Thanks in advance....
>
> Brad

Unless you are shooting photos for eBay, where a smaller picture will work
fine and be easier to upload, you just never know when you will come across
that one shot, the one you really want to save and blow up into a nice
print. If you don't shoot at the highest setting you'll never be able to
get that shot back again. You can always make large megapixel shot smaller,
but you can't go the other way. If you have to, get a bigger memory card.

As to your other question, your camera probably has a slow shutter lag, and
this is normal with a lot of point and shoot cameras. About the only way
you can get around this is to buy a camera -- usually a DSLR -- that has a
short shutter lag. My D70 is ready to shoot the instant you turn it on, and
there is no shutter lag -- that's why I got it. Flash will always slow
thing down a bit because the flash has to recharge before the next shot.
Anonymous
June 8, 2005 6:09:41 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Brad <bjdbradnospam@gmail.com> writes:

> Am I missing something or is it a complete and total no brainer to
> shoot my pictures at 1 megapixel as long as I can change them to a
> higher resolution if and when I want it.....

You can never *ever* under any meaningful circumstances increase
resolution. You can make your files bigger, but it's not the same
thing. Information not captured in the original shot will never
*ever* be in your picture.

As I see it, it's a complete and total no-brainer to always shoot at
the max resolution of my camera, even if I think I'm just taking some
quick photos to sell some junk on ebay.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:D d-b@dd-b.net>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/&gt;
RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/&gt; <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/&gt;
Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/&gt; <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/&gt;
Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/&gt;
June 8, 2005 8:24:05 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On 7 Jun 2005 19:19:38 -0700, "Scott W" <biphoto@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>
>Brad wrote:
>> Am I missing something or is it a complete and total no brainer to
>> shoot my pictures at 1 megapixel as long as I can change them to a
>> higher resolution if and when I want it.....
>>
>> Also I realize I need to do a lot more practice shooting but does
>> anyone have any tips shooting flash pictures and get the picture I
>> actually framed .....I have and I imagine most cameras have a lag
>> between the pressing of the shutter and the actual picture
>> snapped......I may have even noticed some of this without the flash
>> but it seems to be more of a lag with the flash.......for instance my
>> cat playing with something or I am shooting him doing something
>> devilish and I end up with his ass running down the hall instead of
>> his dubious deed.......
>>
>I might not be understanding you fully but I believe you are saying
>that you believe you can shoot a photos at 1 megapixel and then change
>that photos to a higher resolution at a later date. You can't shoot at
>a lower resolution and then change it to a higher resolution and not
>get a blurry photo. If you could simply change to a higher resolution
>latter then why not shot just one pixel and change it latter. In
>general it is best to shot at the highest resolution your camera
>supports, then down sample if you want a photos with less pixels.
>
>Scott


I thought this was to good to be true but here is what I
thought.....my camera when I am viewing a picture taken at 5
megapixels gives me an option to shoot the same picture again at a
lower resolution and vice versa.....after I reshoot the picture it
says producing photo and I now have two pictures in my memory one that
says its 1 megapixel and one that says its 5 megapixels......so in my
lack of wisdom I figured shoot at the lower resolution for more
storage and then if its a great picture I want to keep or blow up I
change it to the 5 megapixel.

Is my camera just taking a copy of the original picture then and
marking it falsely with a different resolution?

Brad

LIFE'S JOURNEY IS NOT TO ARRIVE AT THE GRAVE SAFELY IN A
WELL-PRESERVED BODY, BUT RATHER TO SKID IN SIDEWAYS, TOTALLY WORN OUT,
SHOUTING... " HOLY @#$%... WHAT A RIDE!"
Anonymous
June 8, 2005 8:24:06 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Brad" <bjdbradnospam@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:f8sca19n5gd13etflglvcaoh9d3cdmhf7b@4ax.com...
> On 7 Jun 2005 19:19:38 -0700, "Scott W" <biphoto@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>Brad wrote:
>>> Am I missing something or is it a complete and total no brainer to
>>> shoot my pictures at 1 megapixel as long as I can change them to a
>>> higher resolution if and when I want it.....
>>>
>>> Also I realize I need to do a lot more practice shooting but does
>>> anyone have any tips shooting flash pictures and get the picture I
>>> actually framed .....I have and I imagine most cameras have a lag
>>> between the pressing of the shutter and the actual picture
>>> snapped......I may have even noticed some of this without the flash
>>> but it seems to be more of a lag with the flash.......for instance my
>>> cat playing with something or I am shooting him doing something
>>> devilish and I end up with his ass running down the hall instead of
>>> his dubious deed.......
>>>
>>I might not be understanding you fully but I believe you are saying
>>that you believe you can shoot a photos at 1 megapixel and then change
>>that photos to a higher resolution at a later date. You can't shoot at
>>a lower resolution and then change it to a higher resolution and not
>>get a blurry photo. If you could simply change to a higher resolution
>>latter then why not shot just one pixel and change it latter. In
>>general it is best to shot at the highest resolution your camera
>>supports, then down sample if you want a photos with less pixels.
>>
>>Scott
>
>
> I thought this was to good to be true but here is what I
> thought.....my camera when I am viewing a picture taken at 5
> megapixels gives me an option to shoot the same picture again at a
> lower resolution and vice versa.....after I reshoot the picture it
> says producing photo and I now have two pictures in my memory one that
> says its 1 megapixel and one that says its 5 megapixels......so in my
> lack of wisdom I figured shoot at the lower resolution for more
> storage and then if its a great picture I want to keep or blow up I
> change it to the 5 megapixel.
>
> Is my camera just taking a copy of the original picture then and
> marking it falsely with a different resolution?
>
> Brad
>
> LIFE'S JOURNEY IS NOT TO ARRIVE AT THE GRAVE SAFELY IN A
> WELL-PRESERVED BODY, BUT RATHER TO SKID IN SIDEWAYS, TOTALLY WORN OUT,
> SHOUTING... " HOLY @#$%... WHAT A RIDE!"
>

As the man said, there ain't no such thing as a free lunch... You give up
resolution for storage, but you've given up resolution. You can't get it
back with a magic bullet. Your camera may be re-resolving the existing
image, but it isn't falsely labeling it lower res, it is indeed lower res.
If it is giving you a higher res #, it is re-taking the image...

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
Anonymous
June 8, 2005 7:03:20 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Larry R Harrison Jr" <noone@noone.com> wrote in
news:H7tpe.2058$xr.935@fed1read05:

> Always, always, ALWAYS shoot at the highest resolution your camera
> is capable of. There is no reason to pay for 5 megapixels of
> resolution (say) only to then just shoot at 1 megapixel. I mean, I
> recently got a 2 megapixel for everyday purposes and only paid $25
> for it. A Canon Powershot A20. Why spend $250 or so on more
> resolution if you're not going to use it?
>
> LRH
>
>

Where did you get this A20 for $25.00? Enquiring minds want to know!

BTW - Brad, I agree - always shoot at the highest resolution your camera
is capable of. You can always resave your pictures at a lower
resolution, but can't go from low resolution to high resolution.

--
Eric Babula
Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
Anonymous
June 8, 2005 11:53:55 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Eric Babula" <ebabula@care2.com> wrote in message
news:Xns966F666C761E9ebabulacare2com@66.192.254.231...

> Where did you get this A20 for $25.00? Enquiring minds want to know!
>
AnAndTech.Com. They much more commonly sell computer parts, but you will
find a few digital cameras there for sale. Typically they tend to be more
P/S types than D-SLR types.

That said, that price was unheard-of low. Granted I did get it "bare," only
the camera & the USB cord, period--not even an 8-megabyte card or the
software. (Well, 4 alkaline AA's to start out.) But even still, I'd say that
$55 or 60 would've been more "par." There was no catch--no damage, no
burned-out anything, no scratches. It's in great shape. I just saw it
quickly almost the minute it posted and jumped on it.

LRH
!