very early ku ~ the 4mp solution
Thursday, January 3, 2008 at 11:02AM 
In a bog • click to embiggenMy 'talk' at the Schenectady Photographic Society went very well. No one fell asleep, left the room or otherwise expressed any displeasure. The crowd, which numbered 80-100, asked good questions and was genuinely involved in learning something very new and different (to them) about the medium of photography. It was fun.
I appreciated the opportunity to make the presentation because it forced me to organize and clarify many of my own thoughts, ideas and positions. I also made quite a number of prints for the presentation reaching far back into my archives for pictures - back to the 'old' days of my first digital camera, a Canon G3 4mp P&S.
Much to my surprise, as I was printing everything, new and old, to the same 10.5×10.5 size, I really could NOT detect any real difference (that mattered) in the image quality between my 'old' 4mp shot as 8 bit jpeg pictures and my spanking new 10mp shot as 16bit RAW pictures. No kidding folks. When viewed side-by-side at normal viewing distance and at at a move-in-close to see detail distance, there really was no noticeable difference.
I was very surprised. And just to validate what I was seeing, last night after my presentation at the SPS, the results of a juried print competition was presented. The competition judge commented on each of the winners. As he was discussing the winning color entry, he stated that it was a Mark Hobson-like picture. Specifically, that it was sharp and detailed without falling into the over-sharpened look that many digitally processed pictures have.
As an example of a beautifully printed picture with lots of subtle color and delightful detail, he advised the audience to check out one of my prints in particular - actually a triptych - that was made up of and printed from, you guessed it, 3 of my 'old' 4mp files.
Now, I am not saying that there is no difference between the files, because I am certain that at some magnification, the 4mp file will start to break down. However, I am curious to find that breaking point - not by some dumbass test enlargement of a segment of the file but rather by having a few really big prints made of entire pictures. Then putting them on a wall and looking at them as if they were pictures.
I'll let you know.
Reader Comments (8)
Would it still look the same on different papers? I think you use matte right? would it still look the same on say a luster or hi-gloss? not saying you would, but maybe the matte paper helps.
I have only been shooting digital for about 3 years with my first camera being a Fuji FinePix S5100 4 MP. I was a little worried about enlarging my images until I read an interesting article by photographer Mark Bowie in Adirondack Life called "Pixel this" and it changed the way I looked at things.
Don,
Where can I find the article?
“Pixel This” by Mark Bowie (tips on digital photography) Jan/Feb 2006, story no. 2809
I can field this one for Don, it isn't online Jim, but above is the issue date and you can purchase back issues on adirondacklife.com
just because I know the art director there, you'd think I was pushing for their sales dept.
Thanks Aaron. Just because I am cheap I was wondering where I could get it. I guess I will go the back issue route. Or if he is really your friend then maybe he could send it to me in the PNW. Quite a distance from NY. ;-))
Just kidding.
or I could give it to grampa gravitas tomorrow when he picks up Hugo and he can mail you my copy.
Thanks Aaron. I already sent an inquiry in to purchase a back issue.