posted
Well I got my new Hp932 desktop printer, now its time for a new digital camera. I've narrowed it down to 2 different Kodak 2+ megapixel cameras and I only have one question left. One can save as JPEG only ($400), and the $700+ one can save as JPEG or TIFF. Is it very important to be able to save as TIFF? I do photos on signs that I print on my Edge or have Scotchprinted. Any input is appreciated.
posted
jpg or tiff? That would depend on disk space available. jpg is more of compressed format & in doing so, eliminates some pixel elements which you might've wanted to keep. The tiff most likely will produce better resolution but file size will be greater. If you have plenty of room on HD(multi-gigs) then it might be more to your benefit to get the $700 model. I got my dcam a few years ago when HD's weren't as spacious as they are now. I've worked with .jpg's in PhotoPaint for a few years now & for internet viewing they might be fine, but I think you'd get a better picture for digital printing with a .tiff.
------------------ Bill Cosharek Bill Cosharek Signs 1031 Whitehead Lane N.Huntingdon,Pa 15642 bcosharek@juno.com
Posts: 704 | From: N.Huntingdon, Pa, USA | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
Check out www.zdnet.com website. Just been there looking for something else & saw: "Cutting-edge cameras cost less than $650" for review of (5) 3+ mp dcams.
------------------ Bill Cosharek Bill Cosharek Signs 1031 Whitehead Lane N.Huntingdon,Pa 15642 bcosharek@juno.com
Posts: 704 | From: N.Huntingdon, Pa, USA | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
chuck just bought a toshiba pdr-m60 2.3 pixels, uses AA batteries(can find anywhere)comes with a 4 meg card would recomend a 16-or 32 takes fantastic pics and has a black and white mode....great for getting a vector graphic....it also has 3-4 levels of pic reseloution...and will do up to 1798x1260...which is really good and i got it for $399.00 have seen it on some camera sites for $379.00+ shipping.....
------------------ joe pribish-A SIGN MINT 2811 longleaf Dr. pensacola, fl 32526 850-944-5060 BEWARE THE TRUTH.....YOU MAY NOT LIKE WHAT YOU FIND
Posts: 11582 | From: pensacola, fl. usa | Registered: Nov 1998
| IP: Logged |
posted
A TIF file holds more color information than a JPG file. If you intend to use it for Edge printing, you need to be able to generate a file that will allow you to create the bitmap at 100dpi at full size for printing purposes.
I agree with Sarah.....I would go with at least a 3.3 megapixel camera. An 8x10 photograph at 100dpi comes out to a 2.4 meg TIF file. A 24"x36" TIF file at 100dpi comes out to about 26megs.
posted
TIFF is important if you are going to do printing that you intend to sell, JPG's just dont cut it.
I was at a high end camera shop this weekend lookin at new digital cameras and the salesman gave me a good reference to find the camera with the right resolution.
These numbers are assuming you print at 300 DPI, and are close approximations to size.
2+ Megapixels is good for 3x5" prints
3+ Megapixels is good for 5x7" prints
4+ Megapixels is good for 8x10" prints.
Now, you can also cut the resolution to 100 DPI then that triples the sizes, ei: 6x10, 10x14, 16x20 which just might be acceptible for an edge print standing a few feet back.
If the amount of storage space in the camera is an issue, look at cameras that accept the microdrive. The microdrive is similar to a flash card except it can store 1 GIG's worth of photos.. in the largest JPG format that could be close to 1000 images, in TIFF format it could be 100 images.
If you need zoom power, Sony has the entire field beat to a pulp. Thier higher end Mavica cameras have 10X optical zoom and 20X digital zoom, unfortunately Mavicas cant hold squat for high res photos because of the floppy drives and their camera model that writes pics onto CD (the CD is part of the camera) costs $1000.
------------------ Mike Pipes -----trapped in a box with a computer and a slice of cheese-----
Posts: 145 | From: Lake Havasu City, AZ | Registered: Dec 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thanks for all the valuable info. I think I'll take Sarah's and Glenn's advice and go more megapixels. I did find out on those Sonys that use floppies (I had one) they now offer an adapter to fit a memory stick in the floppy drive to hold more pictures but they're still not high res pictures. Thanks
posted
Id sure advise to get one that uses a microdrive too. The Canon G1 and Casio do. Otherwise a very large card. Most of these cameras also allow you take a photo in a tiff or raw file format but you need large storage. Also might be wise to get the Alimira Genuine Fractuals for resampling to large sizes. Glenn is pretty right on. When i want to make a fine 8x10 print from a 300 ppi tiff, i end up with around a 26 meg file.
------------------
[This message has been edited by Sarah (edited February 14, 2001).]
When I decided to upgrade from the Kodak 265, I did a lot of comparison shopping. Resolution was important to me, but also the ability to get the image printed with as little photo editing as possible and as little down time from having to re-charge or switch batteries. I loved my Kodaks (had the 260 first) but they were battery hogs and the out of the camera pics were too red. I found the following site to be invaluable for comparing the different models available. http://www.imaging-resource.com/DIGCAM04.HTM I've noticed they have a page on this site for ordering the test pictures, but it really doesn't do you any good to view pics printed on someone else's printer. What I did was to save each camera's online sample pictures (indoor/outdoor/portrait) to my hard drive and print them one at a time (be sure to label them) and was able to narrow down my choice using side by side comparisons. I also used the following site to double check my narrowed down selections: http://www.steves-digicams.com/hardware_reviews.html
I had it narrowed down to the Nikon 900 and the Canon G-1. I chose the Canon and I've been extremely pleased with it. The battery lasts for 200 shots.
------------------ Kelli Cajigas aka Janda Dolphin deSigns & Banners “A satisfied customer will tell two friends, a dissatisfied customer will tell ten.”
posted
I only use digital cameras for onsite photos, to show clients what their sign would look like on their building, trucks, etc. I haven't found one yet that would give me the resolution to print anything bigger than an 8x10 with any sort of quality. Film is still the best way to go for BIG stuff. Our film scanner can produce 88 meg files from a 35mm slide with little grain.
------------------ Eric Patzer A.S.A.P. Design Lafayette, CO epatzer@earthlink.net
Posts: 208 | From: Lafayette, CO USA | Registered: Nov 1998
| IP: Logged |
posted
Digital imaging whether from a camera or scanner virtually always needs some sharpening and touch up in a photo editing program. The digital darkroom is as essential as the real darkroom for film prints, especially if you are gonna print them. and a program like Genuine Fractuals if you are going to have to resample up for very large output.
I Edge print a lot of pictures. We bought an Olympus c3000 3.34 megapixel for $800.
I wrote an article for Sign Builder Illustrated that will be out in March which discusses this very issue.
I took a picture of a beer bottle with my Cannon EOS RebelX 35 mm / scanned it at high resolution and printed it 42 inches high by 11.7 wide (width of the EDGE printing head, EXCELLENT RESULTS....BUT BUT BUT BUT BUT
I took a picture of another bottle (root beer) with the Olumpus c3000 3.34 megapixel and printed the same size picture (42 x 11.7) and the results were CRYSTAL CLEAR RESOLUTION.....way better than the Cannon 35mm reproduction.
We bouught a 32 meg card and a AC Adapter to save the batteries. The Camera downloads right into the computer with a USB connection.
Hope this helps.
------------------ Draper The Signmaker Bloomington Illinois USA Stop in and visit a while! 309-828-7110 signman@davesworld.net Raptorman or Draper_Dave on mIRC chat
Posts: 2883 | From: Bloomington Illinois USA | Registered: Nov 1998
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic