Camera Resolution

[the_cat_keeper]

Hey there - any chance that the color depth of your display is too low?

Assuming you are using a PC - right click on the desktop, go to properties, and verify that the settings shows "color quality" or "color depth" of 16 bit or 24 bit (thousands/millions, or 65,000/1.6m). If for some reason, your display is set to 4 bit (16 color) or 8 bit (256 color), that might look bad.

Nice pic on my monitor.

Riot

Thanks, I've just checked this too... I used the pix on both my PC at home and the one at work. The one at home looks slightly better and it's set at 32bits so probably the PC at work has lower colour quality. Will check this tomorrow.

 

[the_cat_keeper]

Could you be stretching the image when using it in the background? I recall at least three options when setting a background: 1) Tile, 2) Center and 3) Stretch which would resize the image so that it fills the whole screen. While the image is fine as posted, if you take a 500x670 image and stretch it to cover a 1280x1024 or a 1024x768 (two common resolutions) screen, it may look a bit grainy.

Hi, I did use the "stretch" option.

What is the difference between the picture's resolution (in this case, I had set it to 1600 x 1200) and the screen resolution (set to 1024 x 768)?

Comparing the numbers (literally), does it mean that my picture looks grainy because my screen resolution is too low and at the same time, i had stretched the picture? I tried to adjust the screen resolution but found that all it does is change the font/ icon size?

I think I'm going to try using the highest resolution (2048X1536) as Sprain uses and see if it works.

Thanks...

 

[zboss]

You're using that image and think it looks grainy?? It looks pretty darn good over here..

that camera sucks... you should probable donate it to my collection... you can send it to...

just kidding - that's a great pic! Keep shooting!

 

[the_cat_keeper]

No, you'd need to upgrade the camera..

Was thinking why don't manufacturers make their cameras such that we can upgrade parts, just like what we do with computers, and at times, mobile phones.

 

[the_cat_keeper]

that camera sucks... you should probable donate it to my collection... you can send it to...

just kidding - that's a great pic! Keep shooting!

Well, I love my camera despite its shortcomings... plus I wouldn't want it to develop some kind of complex, hanging out with your collection.

 

[sprain]

Thank you :blush:... you may have hit it right on the nail. I just checked my resolution and I had it set at 1600 x 1200. This is probably too small? What does most people set their resolution at?

I would say go for the maximum possible. It gives you more room to play around with cropping if needed. Further, the S1 is only 3.2mb and the best possible resolution (Large, Superfine) is less than 2mb per file.

 

[jklassy]

I found your dialog interesting, so I checked out the picture. I have to say, on my computer, it looks really damn good. Not a bit of grain. Remarkably crisp, in fact.

 

[the_cat_keeper]

I found your dialog interesting, so I checked out the picture. I have to say, on my computer, it looks really damn good. Not a bit of grain. Remarkably crisp, in fact.

I thought it was strange so I downloaded another pix (http://www.scubaboard.com/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/19256/cat/978) onto the PC at work (the same one that I wanted to use for my other pix) yesterday, and it turned out fine. Funny thing is it's the same resolution but it doesn't look grainy.

I'm really confused now.

 

[Jeff Toorish]

That photo looks great. It's not a resolution issue, at least for online.

If you are shooting jpgs, which I suspect you are, set the resolution to large/fine. That will give you the highest resolution. The size of the censor, whether is is CCD or CMOS, will determine the ultimate size of the image file. That is really more of an issue if you are planning to print your photo. When we talk about resolution, it's more of an issue of how large you can print. For online viewing, you don't need as high a resolution.

If the photo looks grainy to you, it's probably your monitor. I'm betting you don't have a color corrected monitor so it is almost certainly skewed toward one color or another...cheaper monitors tend to skew to green in my experience...and that might account for the more grainy look you are seeing.

Great photo.

Jeff

 

[RiotNrrd]

I have a theory - do me a favor and try the attached version.

If this looks good to you, then I'm betting it's because Microsoft's "stretch" is sucky. If I understand you right, you are trying to display an image that is 1600 pixels (picture elements, i.e. dots) by 1200 pixels on a display that is set up to show only 1024 pixels by 768 pixels. The "stretch" algorithm given to you by MS a part of Windows is pretty cheap, so it may not be doing the image justice.

The one I attached, I resampled it in Photoshop down to 1024x768. That way, Windows shoudl display EXACTLY that image, without trying to smush it down to fit on your monitor. Photoshop, unlike MS, spent a lot of time making sure that when they resize an image, it loses as little quality as possible.

Let me know if that fixes the problem.

Riot