3 ms·
In support of the claim that 16MP is enough, it is also instructive to recall that a full magazine page at 300 DPI is ~8.4 megapixels. So 16MP is technically ju
by semi-extrinsic 10y ago
In support of the claim that 16MP is enough, it is also instructive to recall that a full magazine page at 300 DPI is ~8.4 megapixels. So 16MP is technically just about good enough for a double-page spread.
- brudgers 10y agoWith a Bayer sensor [1], multiple pixels are interpolated to determine the color and luminance of each output pixel...a typical digital camera can not capture two adjacent red pixels. On the other hand, print inks will tend to bleed and so it's hard to pixel peep a magazine image. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayer_filter https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayer_filter
- emn13 10y agoThat's around 300 PPI, which is way more than enough; most photographs don't consist of super-high-contrast aliased lines, and thus will typically look OK printed at considerably less than 300PPI; depending on context you could go as low as 100-200PPI. 300DPI is a bare minimum more because then the printer dots are bare visible; and of course you need many printer dots per pixel to be able to create smooth-looking gradients. It doesn't say as much about pixels. Of course, if you're printing sub-8MP images on a full page, then you can count on all those pixels being important, so any pixel-level defects that are usually hidden by their tiny size will become visible (hot pixels, noise, that kind of thing)