RAW 240 dpi - D200

Displaying 1 to 13 of 13 matches.
raisbeckfoto
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Tue Jun 26, 2007 3:43AM

I'm shooting with a Nikon D200 and just started taking pics in RAW format.  When I bring them into Photoshop the dpi is 240 instead of the usual 300 dpi I get when I shoot in jpeg. 


Is there a reason why it's not the full 300 dpi?  Would iStock accept them at 240?   Would it be better to uprez to 300 and then shrink the image size to get the equivalent quality/size of taking a fine jpeg? 


Thanks!
QShot
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 125 Audio downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto VideographerExclusive iStockphoto Audio Artist
Posted Tue Jun 26, 2007 4:18AM
The 'tagged' dpi has nothing to do with the actual number of pixels in the file, or how large (or small) the picture can be printed.

iStock should accept almost any dpi setting because it is pretty meaningless. A lot of people get hung up on this stuff, and there really is no need.

NEVER uprez shots sent to istock.

If you really feel the need to have this 'tag' (that's all it is - a tag) show 300dpi, then change it in photoshop to show 300 dpi WITHOUT resampling.
kickstand
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto VideographerMember has had a submission accepted to the Designer Spotlight
Posted Tue Jun 26, 2007 6:09AM
DPI is merely a ratio used for output (printing). You may safely ignore it. What you and iStock are interested in are the absolute dimensions of the image in pixels (for example 3872 x 2592).
Gewitterkind
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloads
Posted Tue Jun 26, 2007 6:17AM
Are you using Adobe Camera Raw? If so, you can simply change the setting from 240dpi to 300dpi without affecting the absolute dimensions of the file. the dpi setting is directly beneath the area where the image is shown at ACR.
raisbeckfoto
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:25PM

Thanks guys for the responses.  I understand that they look at the image dimension in pixels.  However, if you have an image that is 3872 x 2592 and 300 dpi (jpeg) and an image that's 3872 x 2592 and only 240 dpi (raw), wouldn't the raw image be of a lesser quality since you've got 60 less dpi? 


For the RAW handling I use Nikon Capture NX. 
QShot
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 125 Audio downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto VideographerExclusive iStockphoto Audio Artist
Posted Tue Jun 26, 2007 2:14PM

Posted By quix429:

Thanks guys for the responses.  I understand that they look at the image dimension in pixels.  However, if you have an image that is 3872 x 2592 and 300 dpi (jpeg) and an image that's 3872 x 2592 and only 240 dpi (raw), wouldn't the raw image be of a lesser quality since you've got 60 less dpi? 


OK - think about this for a minute. If you have 3872x2592 pixels, how would dpi effect those pixels? Answer: It doesn't change them one bit.

The ONLY place that dpi makes any sense is when it's printed. Whether you print at 100dpi, 240dpi, 300dpi , you still only have 3872x2592 pixels to work with.

If you print 3872 pixels at 100 dpi you get to print this picture 38.72" wide. If you print at 240dpi you get to print it at 16.13" wide. Printing at 300dpi you only get 12.90" wide. The fact is, you still had 3872 pixels on the longest edge. What dpi you chose to print is up to you.

Now, in all this, I have used dpi instead of ppi in order to try not to confuse you. But, realise that dpi (dots per inch) is not the same as ppi (pixels per inch) which is what we are REALLY talking about. An ink jet printer may place down 4800 dpi (dots per inch), but it will actually be placing MANY dots (of different colours etc) per pixel in order to get the quality print you were expecting. So, printing at (say) 4800dpi does NOT require 4800 pixels per inch.

If you are still confused, please search the forums for 'dpi'. There are lots and lots of posts on this subject. Changing the dpi tag setting will have zero effect on the quality of your pixels.
kelvinjay
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusiveMember has won a contestForum Moderator
Posted Tue Jun 26, 2007 2:18PM

Posted By quix429:

Thanks guys for the responses.  I understand that they look at the image dimension in pixels.  However, if you have an image that is 3872 x 2592 and 300 dpi (jpeg) and an image that's 3872 x 2592 and only 240 dpi (raw), wouldn't the raw image be of a lesser quality since you've got 60 less dpi? 



No. If you have 2 images that are 3872 x 2592 pixels and one is set to 300DPI and the other is set to 240DPI or 16DPI or 999DPI or 1 million and one DPI then they are of exactly the same quality. There is no difference at all. JPEGS do not have a set DPI, the DPI is just whatever random number you choose.

DPI is totally irrelevant to everyone except for the person who is actually printing the image out, and they can set it to be absolutely anything they want anyway.

Read this article - it should make everything clear.


Understanding resolution

QShot
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 125 Audio downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto VideographerExclusive iStockphoto Audio Artist
Posted Tue Jun 26, 2007 2:21PM
Here is another one - Understanding Resolution. this took me some time to find, but is even better at explaining this stuff....

(Edited on 2007-06-26 14:22:06 by QShot)
sakaasa
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusiveMember has had a submission accepted to the Designer SpotlightThis member has lost their last cage match. Consider this the black eye the bully gave you after school by the bike racks.
Posted Tue Jun 26, 2007 6:38PM
Quix429:
In Nikon Capture NX, choose from the Edit menu > Size/Resolution.

To change the Output Size (DPI), place 300 in the dpi (if it says dpcm, then 118.11) You can choose dpi or dpcm. They give the same result. CNX will retain this value.

When you are finished with the processing in CNX, then use the menu File > Open with ... Photoshop. (You must have specified photoshop.exe in your preferences for it to open in photoshop).

The CNX processed image will then open in Photoshop as a 300dpi.

On the other hand, if you are mistakenly opening the NEF directly in Photoshop, then PS will open in Adobe Camera Raw and it will not use any of the info from Capture NX. ACR sees the NEF as 240 dpi. However, if you want to use ACR instead, then just change your ACR preference /default to 300 dpi.

Adjusting the 240dpi to 300dpi in CNX or ACR will not change the pixel size of your image.

(Changing the image dpi using Photoshop's Image > Image Size can change the pixel size if Resample is selected. You don't want to resample.)

As already explained by others...
As long as the pixel size is 3872 x 2592 for images from a D200, you can have any dpi that you want - 300 is the reference "standard". The dpi is specifying the density of the the ink dots per square inch when the image is printed. The measurement the photographer is concerned with is the pixels.

I hope that helps. If I can assist more with your CNX settings, please let me know.
raisbeckfoto
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Wed Jun 27, 2007 1:58AM
Thanks all for your great responses!  Article was very very helpful and sakaasa, your explanation was also good to know for future reference!  You guys are great.   
TexPhoto
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusive
Posted Wed Jun 27, 2007 11:59PM
Raw files are bigger in MBs than .jpgs, and so the dpi has to be smaller or they would not fit in the camera. It's only like six inches across. (Joke)

This is like saying a 12 inch ruler is bigger than one that is a 1 foot. Or a pound of bricks is heavier than a pound of feathers. It sounds right, but it just sillyness.
raisbeckfoto
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Thu Jun 28, 2007 12:59AM

After reading the linked article, I guess the only thing that might be of concern is clients not being aware and thinking that they're getting getting a lesser quality image when they're really not.  Sounds like it's a relatively common buyer issue. 


The article also states that they try, when possible, to change it to 300 dpi.  How is this possible without having to resave the file?  Sorry for all the newbie questions! 
QShot
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 125 Audio downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto VideographerExclusive iStockphoto Audio Artist
Posted Thu Jun 28, 2007 1:54AM

Posted By quix429:

After reading the linked article, I guess the only thing that might be of concern is clients not being aware and thinking that they're getting getting a lesser quality image when they're really not.  Sounds like it's a relatively common buyer issue. 


The article also states that they try, when possible, to change it to 300 dpi.  How is this possible without having to resave the file?  Sorry for all the newbie questions! 


It may be possible to change the tag in the file without changing the pixel data. This is how independant of the pixel data the 'dpi' setting really is.

Reading and writing the JPEG compressed data without decompressing and recommpressing the image would in fact have no detrimental effect. Just like copying the files from one hard disk to another (which is effectively 'saving' in a new possition does not change the actual image data).

(Edited on 2007-06-28 01:58:56 by QShot)
This thread has been locked.
Displaying 1 to 13 of 13 matches.
Not a member?Join
Cart (0)