[fevbusch]

Since I got my K30 camera body I started printing bigger sizes 8 x 10. The results were wonderful.
Then I decided to enlarge some of the shots I took with my old K100D camera. They had pretty unusable print quality (by my standards) when I enlarged them to 8 x 10.
I then thumbed thru my old camera manuals and realized that my K100D was 6 megapixels
my K200D was 10 megapixels
my new K30 is 16 megapixels (wow, what a difference when I'm printing larger).
I think If I had realized that several years ago I would have bought AT LEAST a 12 megapixel camera body.
There's no profit in moaning about what could have been. I'm just delighted that I now have the whopping 16 megapixels to work with.
Food for thought for anyone looking to upgrade their old cameras. Does everyone out there agree "the more megapixels, the merrier"!! Freddy .

[Adam]

Since I got my K30 camera body I started printing bigger sizes 8 x 10. The results were wonderful.
Then I decided to enlarge some of the shots I took with my old K100D camera. They had pretty unusable print quality (by my standards) when I enlarged them to 8 x 10.
I then thumbed thru my old camera manuals and realized that my K100D was 6 megapixels
my K200D was 10 megapixels
my new K30 is 16 megapixels (wow, what a difference when I'm printing larger).
I think If I had realized that several years ago I would have bought AT LEAST a 12 megapixel camera body.
There's no profit in moaning about what could have been. I'm just delighted that I now have the whopping 16 megapixels to work with.
Food for thought for anyone looking to upgrade their old cameras. Does everyone out there agree "the more megapixels, the merrier"!! Freddy .

The more megapixels you have the higher the print quality (DPI) you can choose without upsampling, so yes, it's definitely a good thing

[fevbusch]

Adam, I have my camera set at highest jpeg. Since I usually print 6 x 4 I have my image setting in Photoshop at 300 DPI. Would there be an advantage for me to set a higher DPI, or is 300 sufficient
for 8 by 10. Freddy

[sumx4182]

I've printed to canvas as large as 20 x 30 from my K-30 and been very very happy with the results. I'm nervous to go much bigger than that but at that size I'm pleased with the results.

I attached my latest print. It's taken with a cell phone camera so it's hard to get much of an idea from it, but still!

Attached Images

 

[Heie]

DPI is not a 'setting'. DPI is a simple calculation - "Dots per Inch".

So, for an 8x10, at 300 DPI, that would be 2400x3000px, or 7.2 megapixels.

The K-30's highest ability to print at 300 DPI (16 mpx) would be approximately 16.4 in x 10.8 in. For your reference, the K-3 allows up to 20 in x 13 in printing at 300 DPI. Of course, you can go much larger than that, but the density of your dots (DPI) and thus the quality, goes down. When viewing from afar (even billboard size and distance) the resolution becomes less of an issue. It's more so when you have a large print, say 5+ feet tall at the bus station, that you view within a few feet, that you need uber high resolution (medium/large format or stitching, in which case if you stitch, your camera DPI is infinite ).

Having your camera at highest JPEG setting will increase the detail as compared to the lower settings (and processing your only DNG raw's even more so), but it will not change the DPI. a 10mpx image from a cell phone, from a point and shoot, from an APS-C camera, from a Full Frame camera, from a large format image scanned with a scanner at 10mpx - all at 10mp will all have the same exact maximum print dimensions at 300 DPI. Now, when you examine all of those prints, the quality will surely differ, especially the cell phone/point and shoots from the much larger sensors, but the total number of dots per inch will stay the same.

Hope this helps.

-Heie

[fevbusch]

Thanks, Sumx. Very nice looking shot. The K30 is terrific, isn't, it?? Especially with nifty new lenses like the dA55-300 and the DA35mm f 2.4 prime.
Doesn't answer my question about whether I should set my photoshop resolution to higher than 300 DPI, though. Freddy

[fevbusch]

DPI is not a 'setting'. DPI is a simple calculation - "Dots per Inch".

So, for an 8x10, at 300 DPI, that would be 2400x3000px, or 7.2 megapixels.

The K-30's highest ability to print at 300 DPI (16 mpx) would be approximately 16.4 in x 10.8 in. For your reference, the K-3 allows up to 20 in x 13 in printing at 300 DPI. Of course, you can go much larger than that, but the density of your dots (DPI) and thus the quality, goes down. When viewing from afar (even billboard size and distance) the resolution becomes less of an issue. It's more so when you have a large print, say 5+ feet tall at the bus station, that you view within a few feet, that you need uber high resolution (medium/large format or stitching, in which case if you stitch, your camera DPI is infinite ).

Having your camera at highest JPEG setting will increase the detail as compared to the lower settings (and processing your only DNG raw's even more so), but it will not change the DPI. a 10mpx image from a cell phone, from a point and shoot, from an APS-C camera, from a Full Frame camera, from a large format image scanned with a scanner at 10mpx - all at 10mp will all have the same exact maximum print dimensions at 300 DPI. Now, when you examine all of those prints, the quality will surely differ, especially the cell phone/point and shoots from the much larger sensors, but the total number of dots per inch will stay the same.

Hope this helps.

-Heie

Thainks, Heie. So if I wanted to print larger than 16.4 x 8 x10 using K30 would I have to increase the DPI in photoshop to MORE than 300DPi? If you follow my drift. Freddy

[Heie]

Thainks, Heie. So if I wanted to print larger than 16.4 x 8 x10 using K30 would I have to increase the DPI in photoshop to MORE than 300DPi? If you follow my drift. Freddy

No, the higher the print size, the LESS the DPI. So if you want to up the DPI, you have to either decrease your print size (increase the density of your pixels by packing more in per inch), or increase the resolution of your camera (i.e. go to the K-3 or D800 or 645D, or stitch photos together).

-Heie

[Miguel]

Doesn't answer my question about whether I should set my photoshop resolution to higher than 300 DPI

Depends on your printer. If Epson, set it to 360; if Canon or HP, 300 is preferred. This is because of the respective native printing capabilities among these printers. Actually, if your image is beyond 360 PPI without upresizing, then set the PPI to 720 or 600 for best quality. Please be aware that "DPI" is a misnomer and I don't understand Photoshop's continuing this illiteracy. PPI (pixels per inch) is what you are really controlling. DPI pertains to ink dispersion on the page as well as scanning resolution.

M

[fevbusch]

Okay, guys I understand now. (by the way, as was stated, DPI really is an illiteracy, because dPI in printing means dots per inch . Them are NOT pixels).
So, I'll keep my camera set at high jpeg and photoshop at 300DPI because that's how printers are calibrated. Extra pixels will just be eliminated
because they are extraneous. I happened to find my old copy of "photography for dummies" just now. And than explained it just like you guys did.
THANK YOU ALL . I reallly appreciate your input. Warmest regards, Freddy

[rawr]

For these kind of issues, these are useful links to bookmark. I refer back to them from time to time:

DPI Calculator | web.forret.com
This is a dots-per-inch calculator, a tool to calculate and convert graphical resolution to real printed/projected size.

and similar to the above:
Printing > Pixels, PPI, & Print Size Calculators
Two calculators: - 'How may pixels do you need to make a print at a resolution of 300 pixels per inch?, and What size print can you make at a resolution of 300 pixels per inch?

[Na Horuk]

For printing, a higher MP count is definitely good.
The bigger the DPI, the more dots per inch there are, so the photo looks more "fine" with detail. If the DPI is too small, then you can notice individual pixels. The other consideration is how close you are viewing the photograph. If you view it from very far, even a small DPI will look okay (and a large DPI won't be noticeable anyway). But if you look up close, or with a magnifying loupe, a higher DPI will be important. If you have more MP in a certain area, then you have more DPI. Enlarging photos digitally usually lowers their quality significantly, but it depends on how this is done, too. Some software is better than other.
With 16MP you can print even A3 and poster sizes without problems. As long as you view them from a reasonable distance.

[mrNewt]

SMALL print size MORE DPI
LARGE print size LESS DPI

MORE is always good.
The larger the print size, the LESS quality you get.

I find images to still be acceptable when using Large format and go as low as 150 DPI - depends on printer and paper as well.

[normhead]

I've printed down to 100 DPI, with fine results. And there's another teacher on here who printed the same image, 92 DPI, 150 and 300, and 90% of the people he tested, couldn't tell the difference between the 92 and the 300. The theory is all nice and everything. I find printing an image at 120 DPI works out just fine and has room to spare. Upsize you image to 300 DPI for best print quality. In general, I hardly ever have enough Mp to print the image I want at 300 DPI, so I always upsize my images in a photoshop type program.

I have a 10 Mp images printed at 30x20, that look just great, has sold 3 copies and my daughter asked for one for Christmas. In printing, every thing you read is very conservative. Especially if the prints are for yourself, gamble a bit when necessary. I haven't seen a loss of detail until I tried printing a 5x7 at 72 dpi, because that was the only file I had having lost the original, you could tell it was low quality, but it still looked good. Sharp detail is not necessary in many prints, and contrary to popular belief, it doesn't always look best. Or there'd be no impressionist painting.

[stevebrot]

I've printed down to 100 DPI, with fine results.

My printer supports pixel extrapolation (data is made up where data does not exist). I assume that is what you are using? Not a bad thing, it just depends on how close the viewer is to the print!


Steve