3 ms·

I must confess I did something similar a long time ago, when hard drive space was expensive. I converted all my 4MP photos to 1024x768 - that was the biggest sc

by enkrs 6y ago

I must confess I did something similar a long time ago, when hard drive space was expensive. I converted all my 4MP photos to 1024x768 - that was the biggest screen resolution imaginable at the time on the "huge" 17" monitors. Everything bigger was just megapixel race. Fast forward 10 years and I still have all the resized photos in my phone (cloud), but even the small phone screen is so good that you can easily see the difference. I've also noticed that people's habits change, I see more and more people flipping trough pictures on their phones and zooming in on the ones they like. Who knows what picture viewing habits we will have in 10 years. Maybe with some VR implants we will want to enjoy our old photos in all glorious 12 megapixels.

gonzo41 6y ago
Not for nothing, 35mm film contains 87 megapixels of data. So even printed small in a 4 X 6 Photo you could make it large and have a really good image. https://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/film-resolution.html https://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/film-resolution.html The storage is worth it. Especially if i can just dump it somewhere in the cloud.
- iforgotpassword 6y ago
  Theoretically, under ideal conditions. I scanned my childhood photos shot on a Minolta at 5000dpi and in the end this was overkill for 99% of photos. Remember the time before autofocus? Yes, 99% of photos were more or less just quick shots of people/kids in motion so there was never time to perfectly adjust focus. There are a couple of steady portrait shots that look just amazing though. Maybe those ai upscalers will save the day in another decade or so.
BigBalli 6y ago
That's a good point, didn't think of it... Might go back to keep highnres lol
m463 6y ago
I got a funny thought reading your post. We have these deep fakes based on data from a still photo. Some day that 12MP goat picture will be the data for a pet-based deep fake of your dog or cat. :)

by enkrs 6y ago

gonzo41 6y ago

Not for nothing, 35mm film contains 87 megapixels of data. So even printed small in a 4 X 6 Photo you could make it large and have a really good image. https://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/film-resolution.html https://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/film-resolution.html The storage is worth it. Especially if i can just dump it somewhere in the cloud.

iforgotpassword 6y ago
Theoretically, under ideal conditions. I scanned my childhood photos shot on a Minolta at 5000dpi and in the end this was overkill for 99% of photos. Remember the time before autofocus? Yes, 99% of photos were more or less just quick shots of people/kids in motion so there was never time to perfectly adjust focus. There are a couple of steady portrait shots that look just amazing though. Maybe those ai upscalers will save the day in another decade or so.

BigBalli 6y ago

That's a good point, didn't think of it... Might go back to keep highnres lol

m463 6y ago

I got a funny thought reading your post. We have these deep fakes based on data from a still photo. Some day that 12MP goat picture will be the data for a pet-based deep fake of your dog or cat. :)