- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Why is resolution a measure of quality for smartphone screens, but not cameras?
Posted on 12/6/14 at 7:36 pm to Korkstand
Posted on 12/6/14 at 7:36 pm to Korkstand
Well I'll try to explain it another way. Just like screens you need to map the megapixels. 10mp squeezed into a 4mm sensor is not equal to 10mp in a 24x36mm sensor.
The primary function of a camera is to capture light, and larger density pixels capture much better photos.
The MP misconception can be easily demonstrated if you take your camera and put it into panoramic mode. It will easily create a 10-20 megapixel photo...and when you inspect it at 100% zoom and map it pixel to pixel on your computer it will be completely distinguishable from a 10-20mp photo taken with a DSLR. It doesn't matter how many megapixels you cram into a camera phone, you will never overcome the artifacting that occurs in the smaller sensors. This fact may not be true forever, as the new mirror less sensors have shown a great deal of promise.
But until that time comes, I guess we'll need to agree to disagree.
The primary function of a camera is to capture light, and larger density pixels capture much better photos.
The MP misconception can be easily demonstrated if you take your camera and put it into panoramic mode. It will easily create a 10-20 megapixel photo...and when you inspect it at 100% zoom and map it pixel to pixel on your computer it will be completely distinguishable from a 10-20mp photo taken with a DSLR. It doesn't matter how many megapixels you cram into a camera phone, you will never overcome the artifacting that occurs in the smaller sensors. This fact may not be true forever, as the new mirror less sensors have shown a great deal of promise.
But until that time comes, I guess we'll need to agree to disagree.
1
Posted on 12/6/14 at 8:15 pm to lsuconnman
Sounds more like arguing semantics.
Megapixels does not equal quality. It equals how large an image can be at a fixed DPI, or how many dots can be crammed in a fixed size. But at the same time, we don't want a 400x600 low-resolution picture if we're trying to print an 8x10 photo. But also at the same time, we don't want a noisy photo from a shitty phone camera sensor, which is totally independent of resolution.
I'm pretty sure we are all saying the same thing.
Megapixels does not equal quality. It equals how large an image can be at a fixed DPI, or how many dots can be crammed in a fixed size. But at the same time, we don't want a 400x600 low-resolution picture if we're trying to print an 8x10 photo. But also at the same time, we don't want a noisy photo from a shitty phone camera sensor, which is totally independent of resolution.
I'm pretty sure we are all saying the same thing.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News