Just as I suspected. Jack
--- graywolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If your take the image from the camera to the printer, you will see > almost no difference. If you take the image from the camera to the > computer doing a little editing along the way you will see a little > bit > of difference. If you reopen the image and do a bit more editing and > save it a couple of times you will see quite a bit of difference. > Even > with my P&S I only shoot jpegs for snapshots (400+ per 1/2gig CF > card), > for anything else I shoot in RAW (68 images per card), and try to do > most of my editing in the raw stage before saving as a 16bit psd > file. > Of course I have a noisier image to start with than you guys do with > your DSLR's, but it does an OK 7.5x10 (fits standard 8x10 matt cutout > > nicely). > > graywolf > http://www.graywolfphoto.com > "Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof" > ----------------------------------- > > > > Jack Davis wrote: > > >I'll work on being "meaningful." In the meantime I'd love to feel > >content with an answer to what I though was an embarrassingly basic > >question: Will a 1.5mb or 1.5mp jpeg produce as sharp a 20x30 print > as > >a 6.0mb or 6.0mp RAW capture? > >My guess is that based on mb, no. > >Re-opening a seriously compressed jpeg should be sparingly done to > >avoid artifacts? B'lieve that's what I heard and have experienced. > > > >Jack > > > > > >--- Rob Studdert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > >>On 28 Nov 2005 at 18:13, Jack Davis wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >>>How about my question? > >>>Rather than retype it here (with one finger), suggest you just > >>> > >>> > >>re-read > >> > >> > >>>it. > >>>(the initiating point that caused the question to be so stated, > was > >>> > >>> > >>one > >> > >> > >>>made wherein I could save on CD storage if they were stored as > >>> > >>> > >>1.5mp > >> > >> > >>>jpegs rather than in RAW.) > >>>I simply question the end product produced from the smaller file. > >>> > >>> > >>All I read was 1.5 meg which I assumed to be 1.5MB(ytes) not > >>1.5MP(ixels) which > >>are of course two independent and oft misinterpreted measures. > >>Everyone has to > >>be arguing about the same thing for it to be a meaningful discourse > >>:-) > >> > >> > >> > >> > >>Rob Studdert > >>HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA > >>Tel +61-2-9554-4110 > >>UTC(GMT) +10 Hours > >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ > >>Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > >__________________________________________ > >Yahoo! DSL Something to write home about. > >Just $16.99/mo. or less. > >dsl.yahoo.com > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com
