Raw vs jpeg

[johnjohn]

Originally Posted by miketoll

That is a big file, showing my ignorance but why 600dpi? I only ever print at 300dpi as the eye can not discern any more. As I say this is an area I am somewhat hazy about.

i bet if you check you photo printer the sesolution will be about 2400 dpi lasers are 300-1200 pos 2400(interpolated) and i aslo bet that a laser print at 300 dpi looks crap!!

you are probabley thinking of PPI rather than DPI photoshop only has the ppi setting not dpi

[johnjohn]

Originally Posted by sufg1mp

I have tried to download and install the preview extractor, but when ever i try to install it, (7 times) it says it cannot perform this action because a file is missing. Id say i am pretty pc literate and have tried numerous things to locate the missing extension and replace it. Im stumped. Has anyone else had this problem.

I am also having problems with the nikon software. Mainly nikon view, It installs ok, then when i go to use it, it crashes and says windows has experienced an error. Im wondering if its my pc thats unstable or the software. It is a fresh install of xp, so im thinking it should be ok.

I am running lightroom 2, but due to me needing to upgrade RAM it takes a little while to do anything with it.

Help....any suggestions will be welcome.

if the extension is a dll (dynamic link library ) replacing the file without installing may not work. the giveaway in in the name - dynamic the files change accoring to what has been istalled so just replacing one of these with a "vigin" file can in fact "hang" your computer. i would say that you have a corrupt file try downloading it from nikon again and then reinstalling and be sure to turn off your antivus as this can assume what you are installing is a virus and not install thet file without you knowing.

hope this is of some help

John

[walwyn]

Last year a local newspaper wanted to use some images so I pointed them to my flickr account and told them to chose what they wanted and I'd let them have the hirez files. They responded that the 1200px images on flickr were perfectly good enough for them to print.

ImageKind produce Art Quality prints from your digital files. I'll let them speak about DPI PPI, and what modern printing techniques paper and ink can do.

Don't confuse DPI with PPI! These two terms are often used interchangeably, although they refer to different things.

DPI (Dots per Inch) refers to how many drops of ink per square inch are used on paper to print an image. Imagekind prints our fine art giclees at 1440 DPI, which is one reason why they look so great. DPI has nothing to do with your file.

PPI (Pixels per Inch) refers to the number of pieces of information that are present in one inch of your image file at the selected print size. Otherwise known as output resolution, optimum results for our printing process require anywhere from 150 PPI to 300 PPI although we are still able to get good results all the way down to 100 PPI. This is our baseline output resolution and as such our system will not allow the purchase at any size that would result in a print using less than 100 PPI.
http://www.imagekind.com/printing.aspx

[johnjohn]

Originally Posted by walwyn

Last year a local newspaper wanted to use some images so I pointed them to my flickr account and told them to chose what they wanted and I'd let them have the hirez files. They responded that the 1200px images on flickr were perfectly good enough for them to print.

ImageKind produce Art Quality prints from your digital files. I'll let them speak about DPI PPI, and what modern printing techniques paper and ink can do.

no problem if you are happy with the result then fine. Printers tend to push DPI as high as posible and dye sub have more or infinite dots. on smaller prints difference is not noticable. when you start to print to A3 A2 you see loss rapidy even slight cropping makes a difference.

Vogue and such are printed at 2400 DPI photo used to have very small dots that is why they were so good compared to the past home prints.


I take your point and stand corrected.

many thanks

JOhn

[johnjohn]

Hi

the bottom line is that the higher the resolution of the original and the better the resolution of the printer the better the result. it does get to diminishing returns, but what is not there cannot be printed. there the more info there the better and in printing size does matter 24 x 36 print must have a lot of data to start with.

i have been printing foe some 30 years, probably wrong most of the time, but from looking closely at work from others and mine there is a quality issue with digital it gets better but it is still not quite the same as emulsion that is simple due to the amount of data the CCD can cope with.

That is why the larger format CCD’s are so expensive £20,000 + but they ooze quality which a 35mm cannot achieve

would love to afford one

John

[nirofo]

Originally Posted by sufg1mp

I have tried to download and install the preview extractor, but when ever i try to install it, (7 times) it says it cannot perform this action because a file is missing. Id say i am pretty pc literate and have tried numerous things to locate the missing extension and replace it. Im stumped. Has anyone else had this problem.

I am also having problems with the nikon software. Mainly nikon view, It installs ok, then when i go to use it, it crashes and says windows has experienced an error. Im wondering if its my pc thats unstable or the software. It is a fresh install of xp, so im thinking it should be ok.

I am running lightroom 2, but due to me needing to upgrade RAM it takes a little while to do anything with it.

Help....any suggestions will be welcome.

Hi

You need to download a dll file from Microsoft Update, web link here.
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/d...displaylang=en

You need to install this dll update in your main windows folder on your "C" drive, Preview Extractor should run fine then.

nirofo.

[surfg1mp]

thanks for the help guys ill try that now.

Thanks for that explanation.

~ Sam

Originally Posted by nirofo

Shoot in RAW, make a JPG, or a TIF from it, that way you've always got the original RAW image to go back to. You can make as many JPG/TIF images as you want from it without losing any quality each time you make a new one. RAW files should never leave your possession as they are your original image file and are your copyright. Any images you wish to sell to whoever should be made from this original file and these are also your copyright.

Most magazines prefer TIF files, but will accept high quality JPEGS if the subject is topical enough. Bird watching magazines in particular will quite often accept very low quality JPEGS if the subject is a rare bird. Websites generally only use JPEGS, I've never heard of one using RAW files as they have no means of rendering the file online.

nirofo.

costa rica all inclusive