All Forum Comments
Comment by Daniel Bridge posted on Macro shooters please form an orderly queue at 22/01/2010 - 11:16
Hi Martin,
Good to have you back again.
Dan
Good to have you back again.
Dan
Comment by Daniel Bridge posted on Hi All..... at 19/01/2010 - 12:09
It's very nice to have you back , we have missed you very much.
Dan
Dan
Comment by Daniel Bridge posted on Tail firmly between her legs...... at 18/01/2010 - 20:07
DoctorJeff wrote:
If the PPI number does not affect the resampling, then why do all the programs provide a dialog box to alter the PPI value?
Because you can change the ppi when you resample, but you don't have to. It just means if you want to change to ppi too, you can do it all in one step.If the PPI number does not affect the resampling, then why do all the programs provide a dialog box to alter the PPI value?
Dan
Comment by Daniel Bridge posted on Pentax users hate photoshop at 18/01/2010 - 19:59
DAE0707 wrote:
The K7 and the kx are let down also by the poor inbuilt stabilisation, it's next to useless, but i still bought the k7 !!!
dave
Dave! I was shocked to see you write such a thing, will have to try to sort you out on the 30th. The K7 and the kx are let down also by the poor inbuilt stabilisation, it's next to useless, but i still bought the k7 !!!
dave
I can usually handhold a 50mm lens at 1/4s with my K10D, so something's not right somewhere, and I'll be intrigued to see what's occurring up in Colchester.
Dan
Comment by Daniel Bridge posted on K7 Review at The Register at 18/01/2010 - 17:03
Anvh wrote:
Also printers don't use PPI that's for monitor and other pixel devices, printers use DPI, and that's something else.
Altering your PPI will not have an effect on your pixel size or print size.
I think I see what you're trying to say here Stefan, but to me it's come across a little awry.Also printers don't use PPI that's for monitor and other pixel devices, printers use DPI, and that's something else.
Altering your PPI will not have an effect on your pixel size or print size.
If you don't resample, then changing the ppi of your image will have an effect on your print size, but not on your pixel size.
If you have an image 4000 pixels long, and you set the ppi to 4000ppi without resampling, then, without further intervention, it will print as a 1 inch image. If instead of 4000ppi you chose 400ppi, it would be a 10 inch image.
Dan
Comment by Daniel Bridge posted on Pentax users hate photoshop at 18/01/2010 - 15:29
In photoshop elements I have altered the screen resolution to 90pixels/inch (Edit > Preferences > Units and Rulers) so that when I'm working on a document and view at 'print size', it will actually be shown at its actual size (an A4 image, whatever the image ppi setting, will appear A4 sized on screen). I find this useful to make sure I haven't used a font that appears too small in printed form, for instance.
You can work out the screen resolution by dividing 25.4 (mm in an inch) by the pixel pitch of your monitor, which you'll find in the specifications. My HP2275w has a pixel pitch of 0.282mm, so 25.4/0.282 = 90
Dan
You can work out the screen resolution by dividing 25.4 (mm in an inch) by the pixel pitch of your monitor, which you'll find in the specifications. My HP2275w has a pixel pitch of 0.282mm, so 25.4/0.282 = 90
iceblinker wrote:
PPI stands for pixels per inch. This is normally ignored and the monitor puts however many pixels there are in one inch of its screen. So you automatically get the best possible result regardless of the PPI setting.
An 800x600 image, for example, will normally vary in actual size according to the size of the monitor's pixels, but it will always be 800x600 pixels unless your image browsing program has resized it.
Exactly. johnriley wrote:
Surely if we display our documents at the native resolution of devices it means that the video card doesn't need to interpolate and we should therefore in theory get the best possible result?
My understanding is that the video card doesn't interpolate at all when normally displaying computer images. It doesn't need to.Surely if we display our documents at the native resolution of devices it means that the video card doesn't need to interpolate and we should therefore in theory get the best possible result?
PPI stands for pixels per inch. This is normally ignored and the monitor puts however many pixels there are in one inch of its screen. So you automatically get the best possible result regardless of the PPI setting.
An 800x600 image, for example, will normally vary in actual size according to the size of the monitor's pixels, but it will always be 800x600 pixels unless your image browsing program has resized it.
Dan
Comment by Daniel Bridge posted on Pentax users hate photoshop at 18/01/2010 - 14:11
Ppi for display on monitors was discussed here - it really makes no difference at all. Ppi for printing is a different matter entirely.
Dr. Mhuni, in Photoshop Elements 4, which will probably be somewhat similar to PS6, if you untick the 'resample image' box when resizing, it will change the resolution as you change the image size. If you keep the 'resample image' box ticked, the resolution will saty the same and the pixel dimensions will change as you resize.
Dan
Dr. Mhuni, in Photoshop Elements 4, which will probably be somewhat similar to PS6, if you untick the 'resample image' box when resizing, it will change the resolution as you change the image size. If you keep the 'resample image' box ticked, the resolution will saty the same and the pixel dimensions will change as you resize.
Dan
Comment by Daniel Bridge posted on Pentax users hate photoshop at 18/01/2010 - 01:06
Well if your weather today was anything like it was down here, then it was fairly bright, if not sunny. As a guide, we can use the 'sunny 16' rule, which says that at f/16, the shutter speed should be the reciprocal of the ISO value.
So if using ISO 100, you'd pick the 1/100s shutter speed, or close to it (1/125s). As you were using f/20 for that first shot, we could estimate a shutter speed of 1/60s should be about right.
As you had the polariser on too, that reduces the amount of light by 2 stops, so that brings your shutter speed down to 1/15s.
However, your chosen speed of 1/3s would explain why the shot's so overexposed, especially as it's of snow (I think). The longer exposure will have blurred the water, but it was just too long to still get a correct exposure.
The easiest way of getting a correct meter reading in manual mode with the K10D is to use the green button, a press of this will set your exposure, and then you can adjust the aperture and/or shutter speed to suit the effect you're after.
Dan
So if using ISO 100, you'd pick the 1/100s shutter speed, or close to it (1/125s). As you were using f/20 for that first shot, we could estimate a shutter speed of 1/60s should be about right.
As you had the polariser on too, that reduces the amount of light by 2 stops, so that brings your shutter speed down to 1/15s.
However, your chosen speed of 1/3s would explain why the shot's so overexposed, especially as it's of snow (I think). The longer exposure will have blurred the water, but it was just too long to still get a correct exposure.
The easiest way of getting a correct meter reading in manual mode with the K10D is to use the green button, a press of this will set your exposure, and then you can adjust the aperture and/or shutter speed to suit the effect you're after.
Dan
Comment by Daniel Bridge posted on Overexposed at 17/01/2010 - 20:21
Or perhaps he was wearing a see-through negligee that got caught in the wind, briefly obscuring the corners of the frame. That might do it...
Dan
Dan
Comment by Daniel Bridge posted on Pentax DA 18-250mm vignetting at 15/01/2010 - 10:34
Dan