Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-31-2009, 02:10 PM   #16
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: on the wall
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 715
QuoteOriginally posted by Snydly Quote
... tin rooves....
You can write hoof:hooves, but not roof:rooves. English is weird like that. Two roofs in a row...

01-01-2010, 03:18 AM   #17
Senior Member




Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Florida
Photos: Albums
Posts: 231
Original Poster
Thank you dragonfly...
01-01-2010, 06:26 AM   #18
Junior Member




Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 25
QuoteOriginally posted by dragonfly Quote
You can write hoof:hooves, but not roof:rooves. English is weird like that. Two roofs in a row...
Actually, in many parts of the English speaking world, rooves is perfectly acceptable.
01-01-2010, 08:29 AM   #19
Forum Member




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: The Villages, FL
Posts: 70
What is the difference in processing and effect between selecting lower MP in the camera an "resizing the pics in the computer?"

01-01-2010, 11:14 AM   #20
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
Selecting lower MP in camera means you can never get a a higher resolution version of the image should you want one later - whether for large prints, for more cropping ability, for more fine control of PP, etc.
01-01-2010, 10:48 PM   #21
Forum Member




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: The Villages, FL
Posts: 70
QuoteOriginally posted by sbbtim Quote
No. Resize the pics from your K-7 in a computer. Make them have the same pixels as those in K-x
In the context of the above, why would he suggest post processing image downsizing to make the comparison with the K-X rather than in-camera downsizing for testing and comparison purposes. Granted, in-camera cannot be later upsized. He made it sound like shooting lower mps in-camera (12 instead of 14) would not allow for a valid comparison with the 12 mp K-X. Why wouldn't it?
01-01-2010, 11:10 PM   #22
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,255
QuoteOriginally posted by gfmucci Quote
In the context of the above, why would he suggest post processing image downsizing to make the comparison with the K-X rather than in-camera downsizing for testing and comparison purposes. Granted, in-camera cannot be later upsized. He made it sound like shooting lower mps in-camera (12 instead of 14) would not allow for a valid comparison with the 12 mp K-X. Why wouldn't it?
When I made my original post I didn't even consider the other option. The only conceivable difference would be that you could choose a slower but better algorithm (i.e., Gimp allows you to choose different algorithms for scaling images).

This is slightly on-topic: I noticed that in some basic programs (i.e., xv) when I am presented with the scaled preview of a high ISO image (ISO 800-1600 done with a K20D), it looks like a noisy mess, whereas in Aperture and Gimp the scaled preview of the image (.PNG image without noise reduction) looks almost noise free.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, dslr, function, issue, k-x, k7, pentax, photography
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:35 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top