DPR Forum

Welcome to the Friendly Aisles!
DPRF is a photography forum with people from all over the world freely sharing their knowledge and love of photography. Everybody is welcome, from beginners to the experienced professional. Whether it is Medium Format, fullframe, APS-C, MFT or smaller formats. Digital or film. DPRF is a forum for everybody and for every format.
Enjoy this modern, easy to use software. Look also at our Reviews & Gallery!

Contax ND

I have been exclusively using JPEG1 and although still a novice, from what I can tell in photoshop, the image size at 100% is about 40 inches by 20 inches. I assumed that there would be absolutely no degradation in image quality unless I went above this size. I haven't tried to print anything over 8x10, but was hoping I could based on what I just stated. Am I correct?

By the way, I just returned from a trip to London and was able to take quite a few shots between meetings. I had a quick look at them last night and I can honestly say that I have never seen any images I've ever taken come even close to the depth and crispness of this camera (24-85 lens). I will post a few keepers before the weekend. One problem I seem to have consistently is focusing. I use manual, but rely on the red illuminated center square to find my focus (it is my substitute for the glasses that I hate to wear). Sometimes I can not get a response from the sensor. At first I thought it was from being too close to my subjects but I know that is not always the case. Could it be the available light (i.e. if light is too dim, focus sensor doesn't work) or something else? I am considering purchase of the split focus screen. Has anyone changed to this and is it difficult?=20
 
Well, I'm not really surprised (just disappointed) that the new Photoshop RAW plug-in doesn't support the N Digital. I'm getting used to being sandbagged by this company. But, who is really to blame, Adobe or Kyocera?
 
I wonder about this, too, Diane, and it is the most confusing issue for me in digital photography. Are you looking at the image size dialog box when you get this these numbers? If so, then your resolution must be around 72 dots per inch in Photoshop (the default resolution). So if you are printing at 8 x 10 then your printer must be printing the image at around 300 dpi depending on your cropping, which would be optimum for most printers, I read. Yet others earlier in this thread report getting very sharp 11x14s and even 16x20s. What kind of printer are you using? Are you doing any sharpening in the camera or in Photoshop? Do you find that this sharpness is just as good in color as it is in B&W?
 
> The DPI for inkjet output can be between 180 and 240 for MOST modern printers. You have to consider the distance from the image for viewing. I used to use 300 dpi, but learned that taking to 240 would give me the same or better output. I have read that 300 dpi can even degrade the image. There is a formula ... and it depends on the printer ... and I will find it and post it.

Michael.
 
> Posted by Michael Hahn on Friday, February 21, 2003 - 6:25 pm: <font color="ff0000">•<font color="ff0000">•<font color="ff0000">•<font color="ff0000">•<font color="ff0000">•<font color="ff0000">•<font color="ff0000">•<font color="ff0000">•<font color="ff0000">• DPI for inkjet output can be between 180 and 240 for MOST modern > printers. You have to consider the distance from the image for > viewing. I used to use 300 dpi, but learned that taking to 240 would > give me the same or better output. I have read that 300 dpi can even > degrade the image. There is a formula ... and it depends on the > printer ... and I will find it and post it.

Michael,

You are confusing DPI and PPI. Inkjet printers print dots, hence DPI...but when you send data to the printer, you send PIXELS, not dots, so your 180-240 is PPI, not DPI. The printer driver turns the pixels into dots by a process called "dithering". It takes more dots to produce a pixel, which is why you send less Pixels to get more Dots. Typically, you'll get better output, at least for Epson inkjet printers, by sending more PPI, up to 360 is the limit. What I suggest is people not res&le the image when resizing it, just let the PPI fall where it does (even if it's some odd number like 341.2) and let the printer driver dither the higher PPI, and my experience shows this gives better results than res&ling the image in PS.

Regards,

Austin
 
> Austin,

You are absolutely right. I used DPI when I should have indicated PPI. I.e. In ADOBE this is under Image, Image Size, Print RESOLUTION (pixels / inch).

Thanks for correcting me.

michael.
 
Has anybody had any experience with Digimarc? How effective and t&er-proof is it?

Thanks!

DJ
 
I have heard that the new Adobe Raw plug-in is usable on some cameras not mentioned in their "supported" list. Has anyone tried it with the Contax yet?
 
Back
Top