Ask
the Teaboy
Q:
What's this 'dpi' business about, and how does it relate
to the 'megapixels' of my digital camera?
A: People
often get confused
over the dpi issue. After transferring the images from their
camera to a computer, many open their files up in a program
like Adobe Photoshop or similar and then discover
(under the 'Image Size' menu) that the image is 'only' 72 dpi,
and begin to despair because they've been told that
300dpi is photo quality,
and
72 dpi
is only
screen quality. They've bought a 5 megapixel camera
thinking it's very high resolution, and now feel ripped off!
Here's
the scoop - dpi is a printing term, and is quite unrelated
to the term 'megapixels'. The
relation between printing resolution and pixel count can easily
be explained,
and I will
endeavour
to do so here. Please read on and you'll soon grasp the concept
(although some neuron-stimulating liquid, like coffee perhaps,
might be in order):
Here's
an example 5 megapixel image, as opened in Photoshop. You can
see
that I've opened the 'Image Size' dialog box, where you can
view
the particulars
of the image. Notice that the pixel count confirms the megapixels
(2592x1944 = just over 5 million pixels). Also note that the
image resolution is showing as being 72 pixels per inch (ppi,
or commonly misnamed as dpi). But, and I say again, BUT, please
also notice the dimensions of the image - 27x36 inches no
less. That's a lot of inches I hear you say, and "indeed it
is" is my response.

Now,
if we make some adjustments you should start to understand
how this whole 'dpi' (or ppi) thing comes into play. On our
next
image below, notice that I've removed the tick from the 'Resample
Image' box, and have then changed the 'Resolution' figure from
72 to 300. Notice what has happened as a result - the
printing dimension
has gone down from 27x36 inches to 6.48x8.64 inches (a bit
over a 6x8" print size). BUT, please also observe that
the pixel count hasn't changed at all, and is still 2592x1944
pixels
(5mp), and at the top of the image size box you can see that
the image size of 14.4 megabytes has also remained unchanged.

We
haven't added or subtracted any pixels, as the pixel count
and file size has remained the same. So,
"what have we actually done?" I hear you ask. Well,
all we've actually done is 'rearrange' the pixels we have.
By telling the software we want to adjust the printing resolution
to 300ppi, it has crammed more pixels into an inch (increased
from 72
to
300),
which has conversely reduced the printing dimension dramatically
- from enormous poster size, to a bit over a 6x8" print size.
In
other words, by filling each inch with more pixels, the pixel
count cannot cover as many inches! Or, in other other words -
it's
a bit like having a large jug of lemonade to share with the kids,
the more you put in each glass, the less kids you can serve,
and the sooner the party is over!
Hopefully
all the above is all clear, and I can move on to a couple of
questions that may have now arisen in your
mind as a consequence of what we've covered!
Q:
"I've been told my 5 megapixel camera will print well up to
A3 size
(12x18"), but you've indicated via the above that it'll
only be photo quality (300ppi) to just over 6x8"!?"
A: An
image from a 5 megapixel camera can certainly be printed very
well up to A3 size, through a process called 'interpolation'
or 'resampling', which is where extra pixels are cleverly added
to an image file to make
it larger. In the example above we unchecked
the 'Resample' box, but if AFTER removing the tick from this
box,
and changing
the resolution to 300ppi, we had then re-ticked the 'Resample'
box we could then resample/interpolate the image to whatever
dimensions we wanted via the 'Height/Width' boxes. Just keep
in mind that the more you interpolate, the greater the degradation
in quality.
For
your convenience, here's a chart (which you'll also find on
our helpful WebPrints Upload
Tips page) that will give a good
idea as to recommended print sizes from image files of various
resolutions:
| Megapixels |
File
Size
|
Pixels
|
6x4"
|
5x7"
|
6x8"
|
8x10"
|
10x15"
|
12x18"
|
|
0.3
|
50kb
|
640x480
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Don't
do it!
|
-
|
|
0.5
|
90kb
|
800x600
|
Poor
result
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
0.8
|
150kb
|
1024x768
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
1.2
|
250kb
|
1280x960
|
-
|
Good
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
1.9
|
400kb
|
1600x1200
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
3.1
|
800kb
|
2048x1536
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
4.3
|
1.4mb
|
2400x1800
|
-
|
Top
quality result
|
-
|
-
|
|
5.0
|
1.8mb
|
2560x1920
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
6.0
|
2mb
|
2832x2128
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
The
chart above relates only to the JPEG image file type. Note:
The 'File Size' column above relates to closed files, and assumes
medium compression.
These same files are much larger when opened (i.e. a 700kb
file can decompress to 5 megabytes when open). For more info
on JPEG files (their characteristics, and how to work with
them), read a previous article here.
Printing
via most labs does not require interpolating however, as modern
lab machines do this on the fly. You will get excellent results
simply by using the file as it comes from the camera. Some
of the more pedantic amongst you may like to play with colour
and contrast somewhat, and even pre-interpolate at
your
end
- especially
if using dedicated interpolation software like Genuine Fractals,
or Photozoom Pro, amongst others - but this activity I would
only recommend for those more experienced in manipulating and
optimising images for print.
Hopefully
you've got to the end of your coffee, and still don't regret
reading this page!
|