good to shoot at Medium size pictures instead of large?

[hotchoco1ate]

hi people im using a 500D and i understand when shooting low light its good to reduce the megapixels taking the picture to reduce noise. So is it correct to say if i keep shooting at low resolution for at most standard 4R printing and web posting it will be sufficient?

I shoot only shoot at full 15 megapixels for large prints right?

Someone please enlighten me on this =D

 

[daredevil123]

hi people im using a 500D and i understand when shooting low light its good to reduce the megapixels taking the picture to reduce noise. So is it correct to say if i keep shooting at low resolution for at most standard 4R printing and web posting it will be sufficient?

I shoot only shoot at full 15 megapixels for large prints right?

Someone please enlighten me on this =D

You have to understand the difference between the sensor pixel count, and the ultimate picture pixel count.

For your camera, when you shoot, no matter what picture size you choose, it will still shoot using the complete sensor size at 15mp. After that picture is taken, the picture will be processed, compressed and downsized to the actual picture file (JPEG in your case). So choosing between small, medium or large will only change the downsize parameters and the compression rate. In the end, no matter what picture size you choose, it will still be shot with 15mp first.

So, the smaller the size you select in your camera, the more it will downsize and compress. Meaning, you will lose more details and maybe get more artifacts than if you leave it uncompressed or at Large size.

If you want the best possible quality, you need to shoot in RAW, open the RAW up in PP software, do your adjustments, convert the RAW into JPEG in your PC, and run your own noise reduction software.

 

[hotchoco1ate]

wow okay thanks for your speedy reply. ;p

Another question though.. Will the picture be significantly improved if i shoot raw?
So the myth of using a smaller sized file is COMPLETELY busted? There is no point shooting at 6 megapixels in lowlight to get optimal performance?

 

[Garion]

The only reason I would shoot at lower res is if I were constrained by limited space, either on storage media (CF card or SD card) or on my hard drive. Its always best to shoot at Large Fine or RAW if you can afford to, for maximum IQ.

 

[enzeru21]

nowadays with computers/laptops and external drives with huge storage capacity, it isn't a trouble to shoot at large or RAW..

now comex coming, can buy 1TB drive at nice nice price~!

 

[lertg]

I always shoot at maximum resolution. I would rather capture the precious moment first and think about reducing the size later.

 

[eosdigital]

I'll never have any JPEG compression on my photos - always shoot in L for the best quality possible, though RAW would be a better option in this case..

 

[Snowcrash]

I would say give it a try, shoot both L and medium. or even RAW.
And after that download and look at it on your PC.

Or maybe even print 4R and see if you notice any difference or whether the "difference" bothers you or not.

Like camera, I always go for the smallest possible acceptable size to ME to enjoy the photography process.

Happy shooting and experimenting!

 

[2evans]

For cropping, you'll want to start with as big a file as you can so you retain more details.

 

[icelava]

Another question though.. Will the picture be significantly improved if i shoot raw?
So the myth of using a smaller sized file is COMPLETELY busted? There is no point shooting at 6 megapixels in lowlight to get optimal performance?

never knew there was such a myth in the first place. only use smaller-than-original size when you are stuck with a small card, or have "throw away" pics that don't need large resolution.

A Raw photo will not be significantly "improved" by itself. but it gives you the flexibility to apply much more [software] processing activities to improve it.

I'll never have any JPEG compression on my photos - always shoot in L for the best quality possible, though RAW would be a better option in this case..

Jpeg by nature is lossy compression, even when you use Large Fine.

 

[Anthony Lee]

Those who posted after daredevil123, read his post again.

You have to understand the difference between the sensor pixel count, and the ultimate picture pixel count.

For your camera, when you shoot, no matter what picture size you choose, it will still shoot using the complete sensor size at 15mp. After that picture is taken, the picture will be processed, compressed and downsized to the actual picture file (JPEG in your case). So choosing between small, medium or large will only change the downsize parameters and the compression rate. In the end, no matter what picture size you choose, it will still be shot with 15mp first.

So, the smaller the size you select in your camera, the more it will downsize and compress. Meaning, you will lose more details and maybe get more artifacts than if you leave it uncompressed or at Large size.

If you want the best possible quality, you need to shoot in RAW, open the RAW up in PP software, do your adjustments, convert the RAW into JPEG in your PC, and run your own noise reduction software.

 

[daredevil123]

wow okay thanks for your speedy reply. ;p

Another question though.. Will the picture be significantly improved if i shoot raw?
So the myth of using a smaller sized file is COMPLETELY busted? There is no point shooting at 6 megapixels in lowlight to get optimal performance?

If you shoot RAW, you will be able to do a lot more to the picture and still retain best IQ possible. In the end you still need to convert to JPEG.

Even in a camera like D700, you have the choice to shoot at 12MP (FF mode) or 5.5 MP (crop mode). But the noise performance of each mode is EXACTLY the same. Why? Because Pixel density is EXACTLY the same. Just that the picture is cropped after captured at full size at 12MP.

So what did that tell you? Busted? Hell yea.

 

[Cutesperm]

Sorry to hijack....
U guys were talking jpeg ya?
How bout RAW and mRAW?
I used to shoot full RAW. But lazy wanna upload every time end of day cos cf card almost full if shoot full RAW. Now i shoot mRAW.

Shifu daredevil,

What are the cons in mRAW?

 

[daredevil123]

Sorry to hijack....
U guys were talking jpeg ya?
How bout RAW and mRAW?
I used to shoot full RAW. But lazy wanna upload every time end of day cos cf card almost full if shoot full RAW. Now i shoot mRAW.

Shifu daredevil,

What are the cons in mRAW?

I have no idea what is mRAW. Sorry.

 

[Odyssey-Boy]

I have no idea what is mRAW. Sorry.

I guess he is trying to say RAW + JPG.

 

[Entertainer]

I guess he is trying to say RAW + JPG.

dont guess and make a fool of yourself. dont reply when u r in doubt. or at least google first. :nono:

 

[lightning]

RAW = FUll Res RAW file
mRAW = Reduced sized RAW file....still gives you the flexibility of RAW files at a lower res.

Some call it sRAW, Some camera have RAW, mRAW and sRAW.

 

[evilorgi]

dont guess and make a fool of yourself. dont reply when u r in doubt. or at least google first. :nono:

lol... @ least i learn smth new... haha! mRAW = RAW + JPG -> :thumbsup:

 

[Cutesperm]

I'd Googleed some discussion on this.
I think i'll stick to mRAW. Reason is i dun need full (finer) details in my pic.

Noise remain the same whether its medium size or large.
Try taking 2 pic at med and large. Blow up med size -> Large.
U'll notice noise lever of med size is on par with Large format now.

Thanks all! :thumbsup:

 

[morning0508]

hi people im using a 500D and i understand when shooting low light its good to reduce the megapixels taking the picture to reduce noise. So is it correct to say if i keep shooting at low resolution for at most standard 4R printing and web posting it will be sufficient?

I shoot only shoot at full 15 megapixels for large prints right?

Someone please enlighten me on this =D

I always shoot at Large/Normal JPEG. Save space but still can capture most details at maximum resolution.

Large/Normal JPEG uses a higher compression level compared to Large/Fine but I am not able to tell the difference on 99% of my photos, I believe so are most people. There could be a difference between Large/Normal and Large/Fine if a small object is resolved within just a small amount of pixels (probably as small as 4x4 pixels?) but how often we need to see such small detail? Whether your camera can deliver so detailed quality on every photo or not is also an issue.

For a 10MP camera, say a picture size of 3888x2592, 4 pixels are just about 0.1% of 3888 pixels. To be frank, I don't think one can see the difference (Normal vs Fine) on a 4R photo.

Don't shoot at RAW unless adjusting every photo is fun to you. You still could do some colour adjustments on JPEG though.

Shoot at Large/Normal for most of your photos.