Excellent points Christian. Print publications use 300dpi. Exhibit displays ideally use 150dpi (but often use much less). And, billboards use 100dpi and often much less - emphasizing your point on distance of the viewer.

@christian.irmler

Жыл бұрын

Hi Robert, thank you for adding the common resolutions! I always appreciate when a comment adds value to the video :) I also used 300dpi for many years for my fine art prints. But as I started to experiment here, I found out that I can't tell any difference when I go significantly below that. In the end of the day, it is definitely all about the distance between eyes and print, that defines the necessary resolution. Thanks a lot for your comment and Merry Christmas, Christian

Totally agree also because pushing the resolution beyond a certain level in my opinion is no longer a photographic process but only a technical gesture. Excellent topic clearly addressed 👍 Thank you and happy new year with lots of photos and a... right number of pixel 😉

@christian.irmler

Жыл бұрын

Hi @dalimustache9844, that's an interesting point. Yes, that's true: there indeed comes the point where it is not more than a technical gesture. But photography is art. Clients don't buy prints because the camera was so brilliant, but the photographer :) Thanks a lot and happy new year, Christian

For landscape, I rarely ever crop, but for wildlife, it is almost always necessary.

@christian.irmler

18 күн бұрын

Hi Mark, thanks a lot for adding this, my friend! Yes, I agree. There are definitely situations and even genres when you need to be that quick that you will have to crop afterwards. Also especially in wildlife photography when using prime lenses to use a fast aperture, cropping is simply necessary to get the final composition out. As my channel is all about landscape photography, I think primary about landscape photography. But we should not forget about other genres, of course 🙂 Enjoy your Sunday evening, Christian

I couldn't agree more Christian. I shoot with both 24 and 46 mpx cameras and the true differences when viewing an image from a proper distance, i.e. from a distance that allows appreciation of the whole image, the differences are too small for any photographer to bother, unless they are pixel peeping. But who will actually look at an image with a magnifying glass? Cropping however, is a different issue altogether but then unless you are a wildlife photographer cropping heavily anything more than 24mpx is not really warranted. One item that I would also like to emphasize is the quality of the glass. In order to even see the differences, we need to have top notch lenses capable to resolve the resolution. Otherwise there is no point. Thanks for sharing your thoughts and have a great Christmas!!

@christian.irmler

Жыл бұрын

Hi Thanos, oh yes, that's so true. It is not only all about the megapixels our camera is able to process, the bottleneck is usually more at the resolution the lens is able to handle :) Thanks a lot for adding that here in the comments, I really appreciate! Merry Christmas to you and your family, Christian

The point about cropping is spot on. I often see afterwards what could have been a better option if done right in the field. Part of the learning process. Quite fun actually. But megapxl don't help for that, as composing is about finding a critical spot to establish a pleasing relationship between the scene and optics, not only framing. Your video about framing and aspect ratios is also 👌 by the way

@christian.irmler

Жыл бұрын

Hi Olivier, sorry for the delayed answer, but I'm already eagerly working on my next video :) Yes, that's so true: it is part of the learning process. I have to say, it helped me a lot, to go one step back out on location, breathing through, doing anything else, and then coming back to think the composition to the end. But that just works when we don't have any kind of stress out on location. To be honest, as soon as I got rid of my requirement to shoot dozens of photos on just one day or even morning, I improved my photography massively. Megapixels instead didn't help me to improve. Thanks a lot for your kind words, my friend. I highly appreciate :) Nice greetings and see you in the next one, Christian

24 Mpix. Very usefull information! Merry Christmas!

@christian.irmler

Жыл бұрын

Hi Marcus, that's good and even 9MP more than you will need in most cases :) Thanks a lot for your comment and Merry Christmas, Christian

I shoot with both 20mp and 50mp dslr's. At times I love my 50mp camera in that I can crop far in, details are accentuated, and I even can manipulate my depth of field shooting into the composition and later cropping. But please don't think more pixels is always better. Sometimes more can be painful. Lens discrepencies can become extremely apparent, sometimes I deal with vignetting issues, and any movement like camera shake is magnified. I usually have to shoot on a tripod. But I knew about that before I bought this camera. So glad I held on to my old 20mp camera. There are times it's better. If I need to enlarge these images I just run them through Topaz AI or Gigapixel software. They enlarge incredibly well without quality loss. Thanx again, Christian. Always great.

@christian.irmler

Жыл бұрын

Hi Roy, that's an interesting point you mentioned that lens discrepencies can become extremely apparent. That's absolutely true, especially when using not the sharpest lenses in the world. I mean, we always can downsize an image afterwards, to get rid of soft bluryness, for instance. But then we could also shoot already with a lower resolution camera, as well :) So, when using a high resolution camera, we should also decide on lenses that are able to draw that high number of megapixels, as well. Thanks a lot for adding this here in the comments, my friend! Nice greetings, Christian

Very interesting and useful vid, Christian. I have recently heard many pros arguing that you don't need to upgrade from, say, 26 to 40mp, unless you want to print "big" or crop "deeply". But what constitutes "big" and "deeply" is usually left undefined. This is the first time I've come across specific numbers that provide practical (and sobering) guidance! Best for the holiday season!

@christian.irmler

Жыл бұрын

Hi Warrick, thank you so much for your kind feedback, I really appreciate. And fantastic to hear that the video was useful for you :) Merry Christmas to you and your family, Christian

Sehr interessantes und hilfreiches Video, Christian. Ich hoffe, du hattest schöne und geruhsame Weihnachtstage. Schönen Jahresausklang und liebe Grüße ins Salzkammergut. :)

@christian.irmler

Жыл бұрын

Hi Chris, vielen lieben Dank für das nette Feedback :) Ja, ich habe ein paar schöne Tage mit der Familie verbringen können. Ich wünsche dir ebenfalls einen angenehmen Jahreswechsel! Liebe Grüße, Christian

One of the most interesting videos I've seen on this subject Christian! I remember in the early days of digital, wedding photographers were shooting with 3 meg cameras, astonishing! I use 24.2 and 42.4 cameras (Sony) and I'll never need any more than that. I agree entirely with your findings. Get your composition as good as you can get it in camera and you will have minimal to no cropping later. I'm glad you talked about viewing distance, a very important point! Also, buy the best lenses that you can afford. Lens resolution is important for critical work. Thanks for this valuable video.

@christian.irmler

Жыл бұрын

Hi Richard, thank you so much for your really kind comment :) I agree, good lenses are more important than the camera itself. What does a 100MP sensor help when the lens can just draw up to 35MP :) Merry Christmas, Christian

Thank you Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.

@christian.irmler

Жыл бұрын

Thank you, Greger, that's really kind :) Merry Christmas and a good jump into a new, creative and healthy year also to you, my friend! Christian

Sehr gut hergestellt wie immer!!!

@christian.irmler

Жыл бұрын

Vielen lieben Dank, Erich :) Frohe Weihnachten wünsch ich dir und deiner Familie, Christian

Thanks Christian for a very interesting and thought provoking video. You talk so much sense. A very happy Christmas to you and your family

@christian.irmler

Жыл бұрын

Hi David, thank you so much, really nice to hear that you liked the video :) Merry Christmas, Christian

btw, when viewing in 'mobile mode' , those "watch this video" banners don't show on the screen...maybe add them into the description section, for those of us who forget to change the browser to 'desktop mode'...

@christian.irmler

Жыл бұрын

Thank you, Karhu! That's a good idea, thank you for the tip!

Thank you for the video. Your content is a pure logic and expertise. I’m using 24mpix cameras (FF and crop). My experience is that IQ is not really related to the resolution, it is much more about the size of the sensor, dynamic range and obviously the lens (I’m referring only to technology aspects and not even touching the technic of taking photos) One question I have: in terms of printing, do you see a difference between sensors with and without AA filters? Thx!

@christian.irmler

7 ай бұрын

Hi Pawel, thank you so much for your kind words, my friend 😊 As most of the cameras have a higher resolution than it is needed for printing, that is usually no problem at all, unless you'd crop in extremely, but then it is more a question of resolution, I would say. If you photograph scenes where you have a high chance for getting moire and you need the details in your images, an AA filter is anyway a good idea, as it is better to sharpen a bit more in post than trying to get rid of moire. But if I'd need an AA fitler, I would not care about that when I'm printing, as the filter does its job: reducing moire. Does it reduce details that should not have been reduced? Maybe, but that's not a printing issue with, its more a question of using an AA filter or not 🙂 So, in general, I would not care all too much about it. If you need a camera with an AA sensor, got for it and if you need/want to print the images, do it. I hope that helps. Nice greetings, Christian

20 (m43), but I can stretch it to 80 MP with a bit of Olympus magic 😉

@christian.irmler

Жыл бұрын

Hi Mike, I've seen captures with high resolution mode on Olympus. Really stunning. And definitely enough megapixels :) Happy New Year, Christian

Great video Christian and some very interesting findings. My first DSLR was 15MP maybe I should have just kept it. I did notice the difference printing large from my 15MP camera ti my 36MP when I upgraded. Wishing you and the family a safe and happy Christmas my friend, cheers 🍻 🙏

@christian.irmler

Жыл бұрын

Hi Adrian, yes, I think we should not only consider the resolution, with time the sensors got much better, as well. Less ISO noise, better dynamic range. So yes, printing images, which were taken with modern cameras have advantages and in your case, you do a lot of wildlife photography, as well, where you are simply forced to crop, which ultimately leads to a loss in resolution. With a 15MP camera wildlife photography is definitely more difficult and a lot of images would simply not work. But in general, I would prefer a photo with a top composition, stunning light and compelling story-telling, over a snapshot with the best camera in the world. How did Ansel Adams say? "There is nothing worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept." :) Thanks a lot for your kind comment and Merry Christmas to you and your family, Christian

I remember printing large billboards at 15DPI back in the day. So this whole megapixel power creep feels a bit ridiculous, unless you have a very niche use case that requires it. People have won some very prestigious awards using comically cheap cameras. Just get a cheap, portable camera like Sony NEX-5 for about 100€ and have fun.

@christian.irmler

Жыл бұрын

Hi @alibarancelik8903, yes absolutely. Interesting is also that I never had any client complaining about the resolution, even when printing a 5MP image on A2 :) Thanks a lot for your comment and Merry Christmas, Christian

good discussion about 'cropping down'. As you know, i tend to favour longer lenses, focusing on something *in a scene*, rather than just *the scene* (if that makes any sense?), and i think that many photographers grab a 17 mm or 24 mm lens, to capture the 'grandeur' of a scene, unlike your use of wide lenses for DOF, in certain circumstances. After capturing this big chunk of scenery, they then crop down to *where you started!* Maybe some advice about that aspect would be interesting, because i think that it's a factor that is lost a bit when you discuss building your composition?

@christian.irmler

Жыл бұрын

Hi Karhu, yes I see it like you. I think that wide angle lenses are missunderstood from a lot of photographers. There are a couple of traps in wide angle photography, building up a composition works a bit different than with normal and longer lenses. There will come a video about mastering wide angle photography, soon. I also like to use long lenses very much. But working with short focal lengths can also be quite interesting, by the way. You should just avoid to use a wide angle lens like a longer lens. But more about that all in the mentioned video :) Nice greetings, Christian

So I need to upgrade my D700 12Mpix so I can print A2 and crop a part of the picture. I aim at 45 Mpix D850 in the coming 2 years and 55-60 Mpix Z8 in the future

@christian.irmler

Жыл бұрын

Hi Thomas, Yes, but just if you really want to print A2 without any losses. Nice greetings, Christian

What size megapixel camera do you need to get excellent detail in your 15 megapixel photography when you scale it down to 15 megapixels ? How many megapixels does your camera have and Why ? Thanks for this I look forward to your reply.

@christian.irmler

5 күн бұрын

Hi Chris, everything from 15MP and above is good here if you want to print, everything above is just a bonus. There is no need to downscale, you can also send a 50MP image to a printer. My main camera has 61MP, which is way enough for printing of course 😀 There are other reasons for this camera. But as that is not to be answered with just 2-3 sentences: I made a video, where I tried to find the best camera and lenses for my landscape photography, where I also explain why I decided for this particular camera over others. Here is the link: kzread.info/dash/bejne/qHdozpRrebqflZs.html Have a great weekend, Christian

once you get past 24mp unless you print real large prints such as 40x60. For me its not the dynamic range that is the driving factor for upgrading.

@christian.irmler

Жыл бұрын

Hi David, definitely, 24MP is already enough for most cases. In the end of the day, it is all about if the tool "camera" fulfills its job or not :) Thanks a lot for you comment and Merry Christmas, Christian

So basically my 16 megapixels pentax K-50 has with nice vintage glass will be just fine. Awesome. So no need for the k-1 or K-3 upgrade later.

@christian.irmler

3 ай бұрын

Hi @semperfi-1918, just spoken from the resolution, there is indeed no need to upgrade for printing, yes. Just consider that modern cameras offer of course also some other advantages like less ISO noise, better dynamic range, and maybe better usability. But in the end of the day the question is just: does your current gear fulfill your requirements? If yes, there is no need to upgrade. Buying a new camera, is nothing else than buying a new drill machine, actually. When the old one works for you, don't buy a new one 😉 Nice greetings, Christian

Totaly agree with you. I use a om system om-1 witch is a m4/3 camera with 20mp sensor. I never had the idea that I could not print anything in the right quality. Only when I want to take a 16x9 image I loose to much of the image I guess. But nowadays I just solve that by taking panoramas of 2 or 3 shots. Grt guido

@christian.irmler

Жыл бұрын

Hi Guido, yes, with 20MP you are totally fine. And making a pano is a fantatic option to compensate for missing resolution, when shooting 16:9 format :) Thank you for adding that additional tip here in the comments! Merry Christmas again, Christian

One thing to consider is cropping ability. I have the Sony A7RIII and (42 MP), and the Sony A7RIV (60 MP). I prefer the A7RIV because I often need to crop a lot for bird compositions. The A7RIV will support A3 in most situations, while the A7RIII will not. Finally, did you conclude the 200 DPI on luster paper or glossy paper. I think the print surface type would make a difference and glossy paper might require a higher DPI.

@christian.irmler

Жыл бұрын

Hi David, yes definitely - as mentioned in the video, you need to crop in wildlife photography. And here of course, a higher resolution is an advantage. And right, on glossy paper we can print in higher resolution. But this is just an advantage when looking quite close on the image, as it is with high resolution photo magazines. The viewing distance on an image that hangs on the wall is usually higher. Just think about oil paintings. They look awesome, but going close to them makes all the brush strokes visible. There are even less details to see than a 5MP image printed on A2 :) Thanks a lot for your comment and Merry Christmas, Christian

There’s a fallacy to this logic that mp is all that matters in photo quality. Sensor size and quality of sensor matters more. There’s a reason a phone photo with 24mp still looks terrible compared to a 24mp full frame sensor. Whenever I see a phone photo on IG I can tell straight away, the image looks flat and over digitalised. It lacks the characteristic of a camera. Remember mp is not for posting on social media, it’s for the retaining of information captured and being able to manipulate it in post production, these details can still be seen after being downsized on IG & fb. As a person who owns a iphone15 pro and a 24mp full frame camera I can tell you it’s completely different in picture quality even though it’s both 24mp.

@christian.irmler

Ай бұрын

Hi @h.o.j2375, thank you for your thoughts, my friend! I agree, there is definitely a difference in sensor quality. But I have to say, that the sensors of all system cameras that got produced up from ~2017 are on a level that makes it completely insignificant to compare. I would never choose a camera for stills after its sensor quality anymore. Of course, you see the lack of quality in very small sensors, as it is for phone cameras. But even those (the better ones) have got on quite a high level meanwhile. This oversharpened look you mentioned is usually just the result of the automated processing, which is done by the phone to create a jpg. But many high-quality phones support shooting raw, so that we can do the processing by ourselves with any raw converter. There might be exceptions, but in my experience you get completely rid of this oversharpened look by that. The problem I see more with phone sensors is lack of dynamic range and ISO noise. The latter one can be easily fixed with denoising tools, which make also a phenomenal job meanwhile. What I often see instead is people who want more megapixel, just for the case that they could print their images in future. And although a fine art print has a higher resolution than a monitor, we come away with quite a low number of megapixels, as we have seen in this video. That's an interesting fact to consider, I think. Thanks a lot for watching and nice greetings, Christian

Upwards of 24mp often shows more noise but modern Cameras - (last 10 years) bettering this issue. I have a 24mp & 36mp & 36mp images on D810 are smooth..iso 6400-12800 shows gradual noise

@christian.irmler

Ай бұрын

Thank you for your insights, my friend! That matches more or less my experiences. It is stunning how good technology got. Especially within the past 10 years, yes. Enjoy your weekend, Christian

I have a FF 6D with 20mp and crop with 24mp. I am not interested in mp just better DR and high ISO quality. A good image is a good image regardless of pixels beyond a certain point.

@christian.irmler

Жыл бұрын

Hi @sexysilversurfer, oh yes, I see this like you. Rather a better dynamic range and less iso noise than more megapixels. But I also think that these two things are already on such a high level today, so that it is not the most important requirement anymore :) So true, by the way. As Ansel Adams said already: There is nothing worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept :) Merry Christmas, Christian

I enjoy your video.s. Yes i use my Sony A7Riii which has been more then enough for my16 inch x 20 inch. I enjoy having enough mb to be able to crop in if I need to. So yes you are right my 42mp is more then enough 95% of the time,

@christian.irmler

Жыл бұрын

Hi Hal, thank you so much for your kind feedback. I really appreciate that you like watching my videos :) With the resolution of your A7riii you are indeed on the save side, even if you like to crop. Thank you and Merry Christmas, Christian

Finally I took the step of changing from an aps-c 26Mpx Fuji system into a A7IV with 33Mpx. The gap is not so big in terms of pure resolution but significant at least for me in others... What I clearly had in my mind is that 1.- I'm not a pro, just an enthusiast hobbyist. 2.- I don't need my PC to be handling all the time those 61Mpx files... As Christian mentions if you're into sports or social, that's another story... We're constantly being suggested/influenced by pro photographers that more is better but we should have a cristal clear view of which is our role into this theater play 😉 Season's greetings and all the best in this new year 2023, by the way!! 🥂🥂🥂

@thomaspampillonia5163

Жыл бұрын

I also wanted to sell my Sony for Fuji, like you I'm not a pro, but the difference in dynamics is obvious in landscape. I preferred to keep my sony. I even got an A7RV to be able to use more compact lenses and take advantage of the APS-C function (61pixel < 26pixel). I also use the functions to take photos directly at 26 or 14 pixels :), very practical.

@christian.irmler

Жыл бұрын

Hi Inaki, that's so well said :) Indeed, I think that we should more consider that our camera gear is just a tool that we use create. And depending on the goal, the aim, there are simply other tools necessary. For landscape photography the requirements are even quite low. Merry Christmas and have a great jump into 2023, Christian

@christian.irmler

Жыл бұрын

Hi Thomas, Interesting that you faced such a big difference in dynamic range. I see dynamic range indeed more important than resolution, althought I also think that technology came already to level, where even that gets more and more secundary. But anyway, it's interesting where that all will lead to. The developement is going on... :) Merry Christmas, Christian

@thomaspampillonia5163

Жыл бұрын

@@christian.irmler I mostly saw the difference in the highlights and lowlights. The difference also plays on the textures, I may be wrong but I notice a difference in the effects of light and atmosphere.

Glossy, resin coated paper tops out at about 300dpi. Details at finer pitch than this can’t be resolved by the human eye, even those of a 20 year old nose length away from the print. I target output file generically to be greater than 300dpi. I print mostly to 8x10. Uncropped file from my 16MP micro-4/3 cameras means ~430 dpi to paper. The inkjet may well be able to place the “extra” pixels onto paper, but I can’t see it. Certainly I’m not about to look at it with a magnifying glass.

@christian.irmler

Жыл бұрын

Hi Robert, yes right, with glossy paper you can indeed go higher with the resolution, but in the end of the day the limitting factors are anyway eye sharpness and viewing distance :) There exists paper where you see a difference even with higher resolution (>300dpi). That's good when printing for a magazine with a lower viewing distance. And yes, definitely: we should enjoy photographs without using magnifying glass :) Thanks a lot for your kind comment and happy new year, Christian

For landscape, indeed, if you have to crop a lot you didn’t see the right composition in the field. Happened to me a few times… 😳 For macro photography however there is often so much in the details that I cannot even see properly through the viewfinder, that I am often cropping to get the best image out of it. Also, often I find it hard to recreate the circumstances for that image later after reviewing and seeing where the best details are in a macro photo in case I want to shoot again with higher magnification! And finally, bird photography, you just don’t always have enough reach, not even with a 600mm focal length! And you can’t always get closer!

@christian.irmler

Жыл бұрын

Hi Tim, oh yes, I have to say that definitely happened also to me a lot of times in the past. And also when it works today in most of cases, I get anyway not always totally rid of that :) But as soon as I got used to framing up a composition in camera already - there was a big improvement in my landscape photography. Macro photography is hard. You could use an external screen though, but when you have to focus stack a lot, you need a really good ability to imagine how the final image will look. And for every time-critical genre of photography, I'm absolutely with you that cropping is a big advantage to master the composition. Thank you for your insights, my friend and Merry Christmas, Christian

@TimvanderLeeuw

Жыл бұрын

@@christian.irmler Merry Christmas to you as well! I do like using an external screen when shooting at my desk but when sitting outside I don't bring my laptop with me to do that. 😅

Computer magazine c't already calculated around 20 years ago with the resolution of the eyes (which is around 100Megapixel) and distance of eyes of 5x time the diagonal that 5 Megapixel are enough. With some margin they calculated 8 Megapixel. My camera has 50Megapixel. I've some prints with 30x40cm on "normal" photo paper of a sun flower with my first digital camera (Canon S60) and you see every hair of the sun flower in detail. :-) Nevertheless you have some additional margin.

@christian.irmler

Жыл бұрын

Hi Gerhard, interesting fact that the human's eye's resolution is 100MP. Thank you for adding that, I didn't know that, to be honest :) In my experience, you can tell a difference when you compare two A2 fine art prints of the same image side by side, one with 15MP and one with 5MP. But as soon as you hang the 5MP image onto the wall, no one cares about resolution anymore :) Thanks a lot for your comment and Merry Christmas, Christian

Hmmm, do not really agree with you on all points. Firstly, you assume larger prints will only be viewed from a further distance, not always true, one of the pleasures of a large print is looking at it from a distance and then getting closer to see more detail. From looking at the mountain with the trees to looking at the colorful leaves on the same trees, love it! I do it and my clients do it.... Secondly, cropping, maybe you don't crop, but others do, I sometimes end up cropping a landscape into more than one final image to print. So thanks, will stick to my 100 and 150MP cameras.😀

@christian.irmler

Жыл бұрын

Hi Rudi, I can understand totally what you mean. But in my experience it is a difference who the clients are. In my case, most are art lovers who hang paintings and fine art photographs on their walls. In my experience, the only usergroup who tends to go close to a fine art print are photographers themself :) I also to that, to be honest. But not to enjoy the photo, but more the find out if the photographer nailed the depth of field, for instance :) There is nothing bad with photographing anyway with 100 to 150MP as you do and it was also not my aim to mess up with photographers wo use very high resolutions. It works for you, your clients enjoy your photos. But I have to say, I had never a client who complained that the image would not have enough resolution. Even when printing a 5MP image in A2. And my prints are also even bought by photographers. And yes, it is possible to crop a second composition inside a composition. You will get images that work though, but in my experience they are never masterpieces, as it had been necessary to change the perspective slightly to really master them. For me, the resolution doesn't compensate the finetuning process to finetune a composition out in the field. Again, I understand you. You get out more images by cropping. If quantity is important, this might be a criterion. In the end of the day, it depends on the photographers aim. Thanks a lot for your thoughts, I'm always happy about getting insights from other photographers here in my comments. Merry Christmas, Christian

@ericreese8783

Жыл бұрын

This is all fun in discussion. However, about 16 years ago, I had a 5mp image taken with a cheap kit zoom lens that I sold out of the edition in the 40" width size. Nobody asked how many MP the image was. But when I compare that image with my 42 & 60mp images of today, it looked awful as there is quite the difference and now I sale up to 84" width. In the end, for landscape photographers who sell their work for a living, subject and atmospheric conditions are king, and mp is third to optics in my experience. Yes, it is fun to see down-to-leaf detail (for us photographers), but it's not what closes the sale on a grand landscape.

I take picture with D700 only 12 mp and print A1 size and havent see any problem. When we see the picture we see beauty of light, shadow tonality & color seperation more than nonsense dynamic range & sharpness. We see photo with pleasing art not science lab. Confirm that 15 mp more than enough.

@christian.irmler

Жыл бұрын

Hi @woodeternal8162, yes absolutely. Better 12MP of art than 100MP of rubbish :) Another aspect, by the way: bigger files need more memory, higher CPU power and more storage on our computers. Since I upgraded to my Sony A7rIV with 61MP, I just can say that is really noticable. Thanks a lot for your kind comment, my friend! Nice greetings, Christian

@pawelmod3292

7 ай бұрын

@@christian.irmlerhaha, I’ve got a similar argument for my self when thinking about 61 mpix camera: I prefer to have 24mpix of garbage vs 61mpix of garbage :-P

24 MP i wonder, if not saving in raw mode, maybe more MP reduces MPEG artifacts...interesting test, maybe? also, i wonder if MP count improves some types of image processing in Photoshop/Affinity? maybe consideration for JPEG artifacts when *saving* in JPEG? when printing, do you save as PNG, or? if not saving images in-camera and to print, in truly lossless formats, what then? As usual, nice Saturday video. ;-)

@christian.irmler

Жыл бұрын

Hi Karhu, it depends on the compression level and also the used algorithm for the compression, so it depends on the software that is saving the JPEG, or in other words the software that is compressing the image. I programmed compression algorithms by myself many years ago, and that was quite interesting. I think, that in most cases it will lead to a better quality if you shoot your JPEG's with a higher resolution and downsize them afterwards. But we should not forget that when the end result will anyway be a JPEG then, we will anyway run into artefacts in the end :) So, all that is very theoretical. I would suggest to shoot raw instead :) And to your question about printing: In most cases I print directly over Lightroom, as I like the workflow. For special printing materials that are not able to be softproofed in Lightroom, I export an uncompressed TIF and softproof and print over Photoshop. So, there are nevery any artefacts there for me. Merry Christmas, Christian

Nearly twenty years ago, 8 MP was the bench mark. Pros were producing some great images. Then they went up to 12 and then 16 and then 24 and everytime they said , this is it, all those great imaages made by 8 or 12 MP cameras , were no good. If you want good images you have to have the latest 24 MP, then the 24 went in the dustbin as they went to 36 and then 45 and then 60 and now 100 and everytime they said the same thing. You see, if your content, technique, and execution is good enough then 12 MP will still produce stunning photographs, otherwise you just produce 100 MP of crap and be proud of it as it was produced by a 100 MP camera. What a folly.

@christian.irmler

Жыл бұрын

Hi @lensman5762, in the beginnings of digital photography a higher resolution was indeed a big difference. But it is really: as soon as we came over that line of ~15MP, the resolution doesn't make the image really better, today. ISO noise and dynamic range are things that could get a good improvement over the next years. But who cares if my photos are taken with 60MB, 100 or even 500MP :) We will see what the industry will do in future. Thanks a lot for your comment, my friend. Nice greetings from Austria, Christian

Too many megapixels will increase the visibility of motion blur, the landscape photographer's hereditary enemy. stay below 24mp.

@christian.irmler

Жыл бұрын

Hi Hector, yes that's a good point. There is even more: a not all too sharp lens combined with a low resolution camera could lead to a dreamy look, which could add to a composition. Of course, we could also blur a pin sharp 150MP image afterwards in post-processing. But I think, we should not demonize cheap cameras and lenses, totally. As someone else wrote already here in the comments: there were a lot of Awards won with just 5MP cameras. Thank you for your comment and Merry Christmas, Christian