Expanding pictures taken on trip
 

Hey everyone,

I'm going on a trip, and one of my plans is to blow up and frame some of the pictures I take. I was speaking to a person at futureshop, and they said that 6 megapixels will blow up to an 8x10 quite nicely, however I would like to make them bigger. If I want 11x14 sized pictures, would an 8 megapixel camera work? I want to put them on my wall, so they need to be big enough.

My other concern is how much memory to bring on the trip. I do not plan to take all of my pictures in that much detail, but I will take a fair amount. I'm going for 3 weeks, so I don't want to be limited in how much space I have. Would a 2GB card be enough? Also, if I get low, is it possible to get compatible cards while in Europe?

Just for reference, the camera in question is the Canon Powershot A630...

Oh, just for clarity, I have not bought the camera yet, that is just the camera I am looking at. I don't want to spend more than say $350 Canadian. (Well, much more than that)

>I don't want to spend more than say $350 Canadian.

You can buy a camera with 100 megapixel and the quality will not be too good. When you buy a camear - digital or film - what you pay for is mostly the optics. With mediocre optics, megapixels don't count. And while optical deficiencies of a camera won't register on a small, postcard-sized print - say 10x15 - if you make a poster out of your picture everything you don't want will show up.

There are photo shops all over the world that can dump your images off to a CD for you so you don't have to worry about running out of space on your card.

A 5 megapixel image can be blow up to 20x30 without actually seeing pixelization, which is the main concern with enlarging digital photos. That said, Altamiro is 100% correct that the limitations of the optics will become apparent well before the number of pixels becomes a factor when enlarged. If you are only talking about 11x14, then the Canon will probably be OK, as Canon's are generally rated as one of the better point and shoot cameras for image quality.

If you plan to go much bigger (poster size) but only plan to do so with a few pictures and want the best possible quality for the lowest cost then one solution could be to buy a regular old 35mm film SLR. You can probably get a decent new 35mm camera with a 28-105mm zoom lens for $300 - $400 new. You can probably get an excellent used camera and lens combo for the same or lower price. Use a very high quality film and the lowest ISO that the lighting will allow.

There are services that can scan and digitize the negatives for you onto a cd or dvd. This can be very expensive for a lot of pictures since the process is fairly labor intensive. I think it can cost any where from .$50 - $2 per picture, depending the level of service you choose (DPI, special processing, etc.). If you only have a roll or two of film the cost is reasonable. You will end up with digital images as good or better than that which you would get from a digital slr costing well over $1000.

>There are photo shops all over the world that can dump your images off to a CD for you so you don't have to worry about running out of space on your card.

I had bad experiences with such a service in France. They a)couldn't burn the RAW files on the CD and the few JPG's they did burn were compressed almost to death while burning.
I mean - if you take a 2 megabyte file and make a 50 kilobyte file, it will necessary show up in the picture quality.
It isn't meant as an advice not to burn off your data - just ask to make sure the shop doesn't reduce your holiday memories to data garbage.

>You can probably get a decent new 35mm camera with a 28-105mm zoom lens for $300 - $400 new. You can probably get an excellent used camera and lens combo for the same or lower price. Use a very high quality film and the lowest ISO that the lighting will allow.

Another solution is to buy an used DSLR of a previous generation. They aren't bad at all. Currently the photography shop where I often walk by offers a Pentax DS with a kit lens for 450 SFr (roughly 450 $ Can) - obviously used but in mint shape and they sell with 6 months warranty.

Memory is getting so cheap it's not a big waste of money buying multiple cards instead of risking the vagaries of burning chips to CD in a strange land.

I have a dozen or so 64mb cards that I find ideal for one day's shooting. I bought them brand new IOP on eBay for $4.

Another camera to look at is the Sony H2. It is larger than the A630 (which is an excellent camera). Like the A630, the Sony uses AA batteries. The Sony is 6mp with a 12X optical and 2X digital zoom and has image stabilization. The serious review sites e.g., image-resource.com, stevesdigicams.com, dp etc. rate it quite highly. Since the advent of the H5, the H2 is retailing for about 300 or a bit less American. Should you or anyone else want an H2, be sure to make sure it is of more recent manufacture since early versions had compatibility problems with SanDisc cards.

With a 8MP camera shot with highest quality of JPEG, you can only get about 300 of so pictures on a 1GB card.

But 4GB and 8GB SD card (which the A630 uses) are pretty cheap now. 4GB for under $40 after rebate, and 8GB around $60.

Keep in mind that CD only holds about 700MB. Single-sided DVD around 4GB. I wouldn't try look for DVD-burning photo shops on the trip.

Estimate how many pictures do you usually take a day, and buy enough flash memory with some room to spare. You won't have to worry about running out of room.

I don't think "the bigger the better" when it comes to flash memory. When one considers the downside of lost, stolen, or damaged cards, the little ones win - because there are fewer "priceless images" on them.

That's true. I am just illustrating how inexpensive SD cards are. In fact, I often see 1GB SD cards for free after rebate.

When dumping image to a CD in Rome I specifically asked if the compressed the image file down. She said no and I verified it on her computer after the files were dumped and before I deleted it from the card.

But...but...

it takes time and money to download, then you have to take care of the CD/DVD.

Given the price of memory, I don't see the point.

I have a 7.1 megapixel Canon PowerShot G6. Using the highest resolution setting, I get about 250 shots on a 1G card, not shooting raw. I recently had 12"x18" prints made with great clarity. I'm sure I could make them 16"x24" without losing much. It helps if you have a steady hand or use a tripod. I also recommend more cards with about 1G each in case of damage. That way you don't lose all your images on a bad card.

wow, a lot of good replies...

First off, I will probably buy a few small cards just to make it easier and given the cost.

As for the camera, its either that canon, or the Canon SD630, which I prefer. This camera is only 6 megapixels, but seems to be overall a better camera.

I'm glad to hear that you can blow up images without too much worry...

For all practical purpose, there's little difference between 6MP and 8MP. Get the SD630 if that's what you want. But also consider the more expensive SD700IS. That's arguably the best compact digital camera around, and has image stabilization.

As luvtotravel says...make sure your camera is set to take pics at a high resolution and a large image size.

I've blown up digital images to 16x20 with excellent results...but only because I didn't try to cram a lot of pics onto one card.

Oh no, you're right! It costs us a whole10 euro and 15 minutes of time and I had to slip it down into a pocket in my bag. It was no big deal.

First you have to <u>find</u> the place.
You may have to wait for a clerk.
The transfer may or may not take the first time.
Check the CD/DVD on your own computer.
Total time: a LOT more than 15 minutes.

The main cost is the vacation time that you paid (round numbers) $700 to get to and $150 a night to stay at. A LOT more than &euro;10.

Cling to your 20th century ways, but with memory approaching 1&cent; per megabyte ($10/gb), it ain't woith it.

Burning CDs/DVDs on the road should only be used in emergency. I don't agree with Robespierre much on this board, but here I agree with him 100%.

Buy enough memory for your whole trip. If one shoots a lot, then get a hard disk drive.

sbmarti2 - The Powershot A630, a compact, that you mention in your post has 8mp not 6. More than enough for what you want to do, especially if you shoot at large superfine. It is the SD630, a subcompact that has 6mp. Either way, as others have mentioned,I would use several 1 gb cards instead of a super capacity just in case of loss or a corrupted card. Since both have a very good movie mode, I would consider dedicating one card just to movies if you think that you will take advantage of that capability. In movie mode, the A630 uses 18mb per 10 seconds. Not sure about the SD630.

I agree with rkkwan that in the SD series, the 700 IS also with 6mp,has image stabilization and a longer zoom that IMO is worth the extra $50 or so. The SD800 IS with 7mps' zoom, while not as long as that of the 700, allows wide angle (28mm) shooting which is something that is very usefull, particularly for architectural pictures - you are more likely to get in the entire building. It also has a facial recognition feature that many like.

Unless you are in a very remote location, these places are all around you, simply keep your eyes opened before it becomes crucial. We saw a place, walked in and told her what we wanted and were out in literally 15 minutes. I is an option for those who do have a moment to actually stop once in awhile. It is not an ancient notion.

Hey everyone,

first, basingstoke, I did know the A630 is 8mp, and the SD630 is 6. At this point I like the SD630, but I'll look into the SD700IS.

I'll probably bring 3-4 1GB cards, just to make sure I have enough room and stuff, so hopefully I can get the good shots... I have a shaky hand so the image stabilization of the SD700IS sounds right up my alley.

I'm sure the CD places are a good idea, but I don't want to bother looking for them. I'd rather just use the extra cards because at the end of it, I still have 3 cards with all my data on it.

Well, I am not a Canon salesman, and am not trying to upsell you. But personally, I really value the wide-angle view, so if I am buying a camera now, I'd take the SD800IS, which basingstoke2 recommended.

I have a older 3 megapixel cannon. I recently blew up an 11 X 14 print for my daughter, the detail was better than my 8 1/2 X 11 prints. I do use the largest and sharpest setting. I burned cds on the road. I know I lost some pics, but not too many. I will check to see if my compact flash cards are getting cheaper.

A suggewstion for you. After you purchase your camera, take a lot of pictures to get use to your new camera and take one of the pictures and have it enlarged to see what the quality is.

I also recommend getting extra memory cards. Not only does it cost you to have your pictures put on a CD, but it also takes time. When I am on vacation in Europe, my time has a high value to me. I would rather be seeing some of the country rather than the inside of a photo shop.

I'm amazed...

There is an article in today's NY Times that discusses the issue of megapixels. It is David Pogue's <i>Breaking The Myth Of Megapixels</i>. Here is the essence:

&quot;[O]ne myth is so deeply ingrained, millions of people waste money on it every year. I’m referring, of course, to the Megapixel Myth.

It goes like this: “The more megapixels a camera has, the better the pictures.”

It’s a big fat lie. The camera companies and camera stores all know it, but they continue to exploit our misunderstanding. Advertisements declare a camera’s megapixel rating as though it’s a letter grade, implying that a 7-megapixel model is necessarily better than a 5-megapixel model.

A megapixel is one million tiny colored dots in a photo. It seems logical that more megapixels would mean a sharper photo. In truth, though, it could just mean a terrible photo made of more dots. A camera’s lens, circuitry and sensor — not to mention your mastery of lighting, composition and the camera’s controls — are far more important factors.

I can show you plenty of enlargements from a 4-megapixel camera that look much sharper and better than ones from an 8-megapixel model. Meanwhile, a camera with more megapixels usually costs more, and its photos fill up your memory card and hard drive much faster. And more densely packed pixels on a sensor chip means more heat, which can introduce speckles into low-light shots.

But you can repeat this lesson until you’re blue in the newspaper column, and some people still won’t believe you. They still worry that their 5-megapixel camera from 2005 is obsolete. They still feel sales pressure when shopping for new cameras.&quot;

He includes two tests, the second one because of the number of e-mails that considered his first test invalid.

True - up to (actually, down to) a point.

An image file made by a low-end camera that's 640x480x8 (even one with decent optics) will look fine on an eBay auction or 4x6&quot; print, but blow it up and you'll start to see the pixels right away - in my (early) experience, in a 5x7&quot; print.

3mp is about the bare minimum required if the image is going to be enlarged or cropped to any significant extent.

He used 5, 8 and 13 megapixels and the prints were 16X24. Best would be to read the article.

I don't get the NYT. I was offering advice out of the goodness of my heart for others who don't. Best would be to...use your imagination.

1. Newer cameras have more megapixels, and they're not necessarily more expensive. Many also have newer features like better zoom ratio, image stabilization. I agree that one shouldn't pay more for say a 8MP camera over a 5MP one, <b>if everything's the same</b>. But everything's hardly the ever same.

2. Memory cards are cheap. Yeah, a 8MP camera uses 60% more memory than a 5MP one. Big deal. You can find 512MB card for free all the time, after rebate, and 1GB card for $10-20.

3. More pixels are useful when you crop a picture. That also means there's less a need for a long telephoto lens. Just take your shot, crop it, and you still retain enough resolution.

So, megapixel is not entirely unimportant. There are times when it is. Buy the best camera for your money, as a whole package. Not just MP.

Post links to free 512s here:

Thank you.

Free 512GB:

ecost.com/ecost/shop/detail.asp?DPNo=4938345

1GB for $6:

ecost.com/ecost/shop/detail.asp?DPNo=4937840

2GB for $22:

ecost.com/ecost/shop/detail.asp?DPNo=706898

All after rebate. And ecost do charge shipping and handling, so one may want to get all three at once.

My mom's using a 1GB SD card, free after shipping. But that one doesn't come up all the time.

I mean my mom's 1GB is free after <b>rebate</b>. Sorry.

The Kingston 2GB is $21.99, no rebate necessary.

Kingston's 2GB SD card is about $18 at newegg.com. Free shipping. No rebate.

Buy.com often have cheap memories too.

One may want to check shopping blogs like dealnews.com for all these bargain stuff.

The web printers I use recommend 200 ppi for a top quality picture, so for an 11x14 you want an image of 2200x2800 pixels which roughly = 6MP. However that doesn't allow for any cropping you may make before printing.

As others have said a lot depends on quality of optics and the sensor.

Memory is so cheap it's not worth skimping on a few cards. In UK you can get cards cheap on the web, but buying them in shops can get expensive.

I would want <u>at least</u> one copy plus the original be it on CD, HD or whatever - but then I'm a belt and braces person.

Michael

I now use Mpix - which is excellent - for my prints. They'll only print to 8x12 for my older 3MP pics.

5MP, and they'll print up to 16x20.

My current 10MP pics, and they'll print up to 20x30.

More examples of cheap memory:

2 1GB SD cards, each $9.95 shipped, no rebate necessary:

Kingston:

meritline.stores.yahoo.net/kingston-1gb-secure-digital-sd-card.html

PQI 60x Highspeed:

meritline.stores.yahoo.net/pqi-secure-digital-sd-card-1gb.html

Just some examples. I am not going to post this everytime I see it. Just illustrating that these deals happen often. Check a shopping blog. (I use dealnews.com)