Digital Camera Question

[tesco]

Originally posted by Triadcool@1 May 2004 - 07:45

The 5M picture is way better quality than the 1.2M.

Does your camera have the option of jpeg compression? If so, you could take the picture at 5M pixels then compress it. Although you are bound to lose some image quality, you would lose far less quality that way

My camera doesnt have an option for jpeg compression. Is there another fast way to compress my pictures into jpeg after I have put them on my computer?

once its saved to the comp, open it with photoshop or some other picture editing program, then go to save as, and choose to save as a jpeg file.

btw, the 5mp does look better when you zoom into the picture, but just looking normal view i cant tell the difference so just use 1.2mp to save space and be able to take more pictures on ur trip.

[bigdawgfoxx]

Both pics look great to me..so if you want to save space go with the 1.2

[Triadcool]

once its saved to the comp, open it with photoshop or some other picture editing program, then go to save as, and choose to save as a jpeg file.

Both pics look great to me..so if you want to save space go with the 1.2

Ok, thanks guys.

[vivitron 15]

I think this is something which needs to be thought seriously when buying a digicamera

if youre using it for an industrial process, where you need pinpoint accuracy and amazing detail, then go for the best you can

if youre using it for holiday snap-shots, how good is your printer? can you print at quality enough to warrant the extra space? bet not.

in the end, cameras of ~2/3MP are amazing as personal cameras - with a good printer (Epson 900 photo or slightly better) you can get fantastic pictures for the album....the only difference is that you save a few bob on the camera and on the memory cards..HDD space..etc.