Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 27 of 27

Thread: Is 2 megapixel cameras good for 4R shots?

  1. #21

    Default

    viv·id ( P ) Pronunciation Key (vvd)
    adj. viv·id·er, viv·id·est
    Perceived as bright and distinct; brilliant: a vivid star.
    Having intensely bright colors: a vivid tapestry.
    Having a very high degree of saturation: a vivid purple


    If you buy the above definition of vivid, then I'll go with mpenza's argument. "Vividness", tho I never really used that term on photos before, is more applicable to colours as you pointed out early, and is dependent on the lens, primary color filter, colour processing algorithm etc of the digital camera. Given the same camera, two pictures taken of the same scene at 2MP and 6MP should have no difference in "vividness". There might be a difference in sharpness, resolution, clarity of a 4R printout, but vividness should be the same.

    I do think that a 2MP camera can produce more vivid colours than a 6MP one. As an example, sony cameras are known for their saturated and vivid colours. Say a 2MP sony cam would have taken pictures that are more "vivid" than a 6MP Canon 10D, which produces more neutral and lifelike colours.

  2. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    1,741

    Default

    Originally posted by lennon
    How can 2mp pic be more vivid than 6mp pic, assuming the same subject was taken with the same settings, color tone and lighting conditions?
    Yes, the term "vivid" is used to describe colours - and some cameras do produce better colours than others.

    Level of details and the vividness of colors are hardly noticeable for 4R printout, unless you take a “serious” look. But if your print 2mp photo and 3mp photo in A4/A3 then the diff in terms of vividness will be evident.
    Er... tot they were talking abt 4R?

  3. #23
    Deregistered
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    ClubSNAP community
    Posts
    2,775

    Default

    IMHO, any 2mp digicam should suffice. The quality of the 4R print probably depends on how you take the pix lor. When I tagged along with one old uncle (I think PSS chap he said), he was just as amazed that my print comes out as sharp and good as his (he used some manual Nikon thingie).
    Oh well, if you happen to be going to 2nite's SEED, I will try to collect my extra print and show you lor.

  4. #24

    Default

    Originally posted by Tweek
    viv·id ( P ) Pronunciation Key (vvd)
    adj. viv·id·er, viv·id·est
    Perceived as bright and distinct; brilliant: a vivid star.
    Having intensely bright colors: a vivid tapestry.
    Having a very high degree of saturation: a vivid purple


    If you buy the above definition of vivid, then I'll go with mpenza's argument. "Vividness", tho I never really used that term on photos before, is more applicable to colours as you pointed out early, and is dependent on the lens, primary color filter, colour processing algorithm etc of the digital camera. Given the same camera, two pictures taken of the same scene at 2MP and 6MP should have no difference in "vividness". There might be a difference in sharpness, resolution, clarity of a 4R printout, but vividness should be the same.

    I do think that a 2MP camera can produce more vivid colours than a 6MP one. As an example, sony cameras are known for their saturated and vivid colours. Say a 2MP sony cam would have taken pictures that are more "vivid" than a 6MP Canon 10D, which produces more neutral and lifelike colours.
    Well said Tweek..

    I think the topic now would be if Pixel size affects the intensity of color( assuming the same media will used to determine the intensity.)

    I find this discussion healthier that the veges from Bukit Panjang

    Just a final explanation why I said that the pixel size or resolution affects the vividness or intensiity of colors:

    Maybe we all know that Pixel contains a red, green and blue (RGB) pixel component. 'Bit depth' refers to the number of bits in an image and indicates the amount of color information each image pixel can contain. The higher the bit value the more colors
    the image can contain. For True color, it’s 24 bits per pixel.

    Assuming each pixels one camera can produce contain “true color” which 24bits per pixel. Can I safely say that finer pixels produce more intense color?
    I dont want to mislead anybody here, pls let me know why finer pixels cannot be more vivid.. If im wrong, i'll stand corrected

  5. #25

    Default

    Take a 6MP 3000x2000 image, resize it to 50% and view at 50%.
    Compare it to the same image resized to 25% and viewed at 100%. Tell me if they are the same in "vividness"?

    Do not apply any sharpening to both images.

    Sometimes its the apparent added contrast due to sharpening that affects the perception of colour, given a 4R print as to what the original thread starter requested, there is no perceptible difference in colour rendition from using a 2MP file vs a 6MP from an identical source. However, if you apply different levels/settings for sharpening, this will affect your perception.

  6. #26

    Default

    well... practically speaking, vividness is not affected by pixel counts. but I will say that Lennon has a point.. and to demonstrate this, imagine you're shooting a picture of a two coloured wall. black on one side, and bright (vivid) purple on the other side, with a distinct border between them down the middle. say you had a 1 PIXEL digital camera (not MegaPixel, i seriously mean ONE pixel) and a 4 pixel digital camera with everything else between the cameras identical. the 4 pixel camera, assuming you align the pixels and the image of the wall perfectly, could take the shot and one side would be perfectly black and the other side perfectly purple (and vivid). the 1 pixel camera could not, and would be forced to average the colours/tones. and you'd get this rather muddy (un vivid) dark purple colour. so there is a point here, but that said.. that's 1 and 4 pixels. not 2 and 3 MEGApixels. practically speaking there should be no difference, even if you took a microscope and professionals to it. that said, 2MP for 4R is perfectly good, you're more limited by your printer.

    Gavin
    *note: for the above discussion, I purposely left out how CCDs work by using 3 colour mosaic filter patterns to simplify things.

  7. #27
    Moderator
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    4,026

    Default vividness????

    It all depends on the manufacturer's camera design. Vividness can be level depended on sensor output post processing - Firmware gain settings,Channel presets,proprietery Statistics data etc.....

    (*assuming sensors dynamic output range - electical signal is equal)

    2Mpi 3Mpix 4Mpix...etc if the image processing is bad....image will be bad!!!!!

    SO the if you really need vivid colors.......then ude PS to tweak it.....e.g adjust saturation


    Regards,
    me

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •