Resolution of Newspaper Photographs

[ckhaos]

Here's a question that I have been wondering for quite some time:

Just for fun, can anyone estimate the resolution of newspaper photographs? In other words, what is the resolution (in, say, dpi) of the newspaper printing process?

 

[maddog]

Computer Screen 72 dpi
Newspaper 170 dpi
Magazine 266 dpi

 

[Jed]

It all depends, we tend to measure slightly differently, but...

It really does vary from paper to paper, and the resolution they will actually use will be very very low if it's the picture. Newspapers are there to tell the story, not to worry about dpi and whatever.

In fact, now that I mention it, photographers should be there to tell a story too. Sometimes I think it's easy to forget that and get caught up in the mess that is technology.

 

[lyrrad]

I was reading some article in IdN about most newspapers are switching to Digital SLR for speed of processing, and ultimately Newspaper printing DPI is lower, and does not need the higher 300dpi that magazines use.

 

[ckhaos]

Originally posted by maddog
Computer Screen 72 dpi
Newspaper 170 dpi
Magazine 266 dpi

Where did you obtain these figures? Not that I am doubting them, just want to be sure. What causes the difference in the dpi's between newspapers and magazines then? Is it the printing process, or the quality of the paper used?

 

[maddog]

Originally posted by ckhaos


Where did you obtain these figures? Not that I am doubting them, just want to be sure. What causes the difference in the dpi's between newspapers and magazines then? Is it the printing process, or the quality of the paper used?

just do a google search. 72 dpi for screen is almost a standard. the other two of course depends.

magazine and newspaper of course vary by a lot. the paper used in magazine is better quality than newspaper. the better the quality and thickness of paper, the more ink you can spray on it. and the more ink you spray, up goes ur resolution(dpi).

just in case you can't find any info here are some links.

resolution

screen

 

[lyrrad]

I know thru work experience that screen reso is 72dpi. Some1 correct me, I think Macs are actually 75dpi though. But we design in 72 cos that's the lowest.

And normally magazine is 300 dpi. For us 300dpi is the highest for offset printing, but newer laser printing is higher. Sometimes too high, too sharp (IMO)

 

[Jed]

I say again, as someone who regularly gets published in over a dozen national boardsheets and tabloids, forget dpi.

 

[ckhaos]

Originally posted by Jed
I say again, as someone who regularly gets published in over a dozen national boardsheets and tabloids, forget dpi.

 

[YSLee]

Originally posted by ckhaos

Ah, don't like being confronted with the truth from someone with real experience?

 

[ckhaos]

Jed, I recently saw in "Time" a photo of the inside of the cinema in Russia where hostages were either dead or being freed by the soldiers using some kind of nerve gas. Of course, given the conditions that night, the photo was grainy, of low resolution, and not well-composed.

However, this brings up another question, which, given your experience, you might be able to educate me:

Should the desire to tell/illustrate a story override the desire to publish only technically perfect photographs?

 

[Zerstorer]

Originally posted by ckhaos
Should the desire to tell/illustrate a story override the desire to publish only technically perfect photographs?

The answer should be clear, images are to tell a story and put forward a point.

What is the point of an otherwise technically perfect shot, that doesn't illustrate the story or add impact to the report?(No relation, out of context...etc)

 

[maddog]

Originally posted by denizenx
I think YSLee shd relax, stop trolling ppl.

oh no.. :devil:

 

[Ian]

Originally posted by ckhaos
Here's a question that I have been wondering for quite some time:

Just for fun, can anyone estimate the resolution of newspaper photographs? In other words, what is the resolution (in, say, dpi) of the newspaper printing process?

Oksy, here goes (ignoring the dross posted previously).

Most newspaper prints are around 3 lines per mm resolution, which is about 1/2 of the resolution of a standard mini-lab print.

Newspaper Prints don't actually used a fixed DPI resolution when printing B/W images, or more correctly Half-Tone Images. Half-tone printing is a monochromatic process that uses only one colour of ink (Black) and produces a pseudo grayscale by varying the size of the ink dot on the paper.

The resolution of the presses used for newspaper production are normally specified in LINES PER INCH (Lpi) with normal newsprint being printed at between about 50 and 90 Lpi with the more modern newspaper presses (Heidelberg, MAN-Roland etc) working around 83 Lpi. In comparison Magazines (Glossies) use print resolutions of between about 130 lpi and 160 lpi depending on the presses being used.

In general if scanning for newspapers the scanning dpi is 1.5 to 2 times the Lpi value (ie: 100-200 dpi for newspapers, 300 and up for magazines.

Hope this helps.

 

[mpenza]

back to the topic (or sort of)... I read that someone actually took up writing (of articles, books, etc) as a way to promote and sell his images. Anyone here does the same?

 

[ckhaos]

I only wanted to highlight Ian's reply (see above). It answered my original question (see above also).

Is this forum a great teacher or what??

 

[mpenza]

Hi ckhaos, it happens ;p

I've spilt the thread... for those interested in the discussion on DPI check out: http://forums.clubsnap.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=23406

 

[Jed]

Originally posted by ckhaos
However, this brings up another question, which, given your experience, you might be able to educate me:

Should the desire to tell/illustrate a story override the desire to publish only technically perfect photographs?

Yes.

Put it a different way, what constitutes a technically perfect photograph? A technically perfect photograph from the, say, Vietnam war does not constitute a technically perfect photograph in the 21st century. And one from WWII does not compare to one taken during the Vietnam war, etc.

Does that mean that we should keep binning old photographs as they pale in comparison to current photographs?

I know it seems to be a bit irrelevant, but really it isn't. Read another way, all that is saying is that the substance of the photograph outweighs the desire for technical perfection. Ultimately unless you're publishing in a photographic trade magazine (and even then not necessarily), your viewer isn't interested in the technical quality.

You don't watch the news to scrutinise the sound or broadcast quality. Why should newspapers be any different.

To be perfectly honest, I don't watch movies to scrutinise the sound and picture quality either, so really why is there a big fuss about ultimate photo quality among photographic amateurs? It's the image that counts.

 

[Wolfgang]

Originally posted by ckhaos
Jed, I recently saw in "Time" a photo of the inside of the cinema in Russia where hostages were either dead or being freed by the soldiers using some kind of nerve gas. Of course, given the conditions that night, the photo was grainy, of low resolution, and not well-composed.

However, this brings up another question, which, given your experience, you might be able to educate me:

Should the desire to tell/illustrate a story override the desire to publish only technically perfect photographs?

Someone once mentioned, technicalities shouldn't be an issue. Composition, and the fact that the picture conveys a story is so much more important.

Imagine for a moment, if you can only either choose to have a technically perfect picture but doesn't say anything at all or a picture that has impact and conveys emotions but technically off (eg. slightly blurred or grainy), which one would you choose?

 

[denizenx]

aiyah those news pics which do possess both content and technical excellence will be those prize winners lor.