Pictures are too small.....

Pictures are too small.....
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> Radios, Batteries, Clubhouse and more >> Digital Camera & Photo Editing >> Pictures are too small.....

Page: [1]

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Pictures are too small..... - 4/26/2005 2:54:05 AM

Skribnod

Posts: 355
Joined: 10/22/2003
From: Cuba City, WI, USA
Status: offline

I have tried to resize these picture for the internet so they come up bigger than what they are. I tried paintshop pro and adobe photoshop but still can't seem to get them larger. They apear large on my screen before the net but smaller and less detailed when sent as a email. I adjusted them for 1024X768 but still apear smaller. Any ideas on how to blow them up larger? Thanks

Attachments

Click to see fullsize image.

Click for fullsize

Click to see fullsize image.

Click for fullsize

Click to see fullsize image.

Click for fullsize

_____________________________

And i thought it would be a inexpensive relaxing hobby.......

Post #: 1

RE: Pictures are too small..... - 4/26/2005 2:55:29 AM

Skribnod

Posts: 355
Joined: 10/22/2003
From: Cuba City, WI, USA
Status: offline

Wow.......it worked that time....screwy computer !!

_____________________________

And i thought it would be a inexpensive relaxing hobby.......

(in reply to Skribnod)

Post #: 2

RE: Pictures are too small..... - 4/26/2005 7:21:32 AM

marwen1

Posts: 772
Joined: 3/25/2004
From: WINNIPEGMB, CANADA
Status: offline

Boy! Did you ever open a can of worms. LOL

Lets use Photoshop ( PS ). Regardless which version you use, you'll get the same results.

When you OPEN a working file in PS, you are looking at any combination of possible viewing "percentages." That percentage is located, (as a rule) in the extreme lower left of the viewing screen on a PC, and it fixed in that position. On a MAC, it is located in the lower left hand corner of the projected image. It will float within the size of the image. The size of the percentage will vary with the size of the actual pixels consumed within the file. That is all very minor.

With your file open, place your cursor (arrow) on the third word called IMAGE>IMAGE SIZE. A popup will open - drop down to "DOCUMENT SIZE". Choose your WIDTH or HEIGHT. (MAKE SURE) that you choose whatever dpi you need and make sure that the box " CONSTRAIN PROPORTIONS is checked. Once you choose either the width or the height, the other dimension will automatically change and stay in proportion.

If you want to print a file, set your choice of format to be a TIF and set the dpi at 300. A JPG will work but lets not get into that right now!

If you want to sent an image on the internet, it is adviseable to set your dpi at 72.

If you need to upload onto the RCU forum, stay with the jpg, gig, or txt formats but you must again, cut the overall size way down. When you upload onto RCU, simply follow the uploading directions.

Once you have done that, your image might look okay on your screen but, the final output is what you have to look for.

good luck

marwen

_____________________________

Definition of COMPLIMENT:

Sometimes a matter of FACT --
More than not, a matter of TACT!

(in reply to Skribnod)

Post #: 3

RE: Pictures are too small..... - 4/26/2005 2:24:49 PM

Skribnod

Posts: 355
Joined: 10/22/2003
From: Cuba City, WI, USA
Status: offline

Thanks Marwen , the pictures are larger here but when I send them with hotmail they won't enlarge and only stay about 3x5 size. Any ideas why? Thanks

_____________________________

And i thought it would be a inexpensive relaxing hobby.......

(in reply to marwen1)

Post #: 4

RE: Pictures are too small..... - 4/26/2005 2:43:02 PM

marwen1

Posts: 772
Joined: 3/25/2004
From: WINNIPEGMB, CANADA
Status: offline

My guess, and experience is to STAY AWAY from HOTMAIL and all those free servers. They do not allow very much bandwidth

marwen

_____________________________

Definition of COMPLIMENT:

Sometimes a matter of FACT --
More than not, a matter of TACT!

(in reply to Skribnod)

Post #: 5

RE: Pictures are too small..... - 4/27/2005 2:06:48 AM

Skribnod

Posts: 355
Joined: 10/22/2003
From: Cuba City, WI, USA
Status: offline

Another quick question is what would be a good lens for taking telephoto shots? I have the D70 Nikon ( with kit lens) and a Nikkor 70-300mm f4-f5.6 G lens also. I would like to get more telephoto distance but dont want to spend $1500 on a little longer distance lens. Any ideas? I have heard the D70 will take any G or D lens and if you can afford one with built in CPU they are better for this type of camera. Since I am new to this digital SLR camera field could you also explain what the f4-5.6 stand for? Thanks a bunch.

_____________________________

And i thought it would be a inexpensive relaxing hobby.......

(in reply to marwen1)

Post #: 6

RE: Pictures are too small..... - 4/27/2005 4:04:00 AM

marwen1

Posts: 772
Joined: 3/25/2004
From: WINNIPEGMB, CANADA
Status: offline

The 70mm - 210mm comes to mind. As I recall, I paid about $500 for mine about 10 years ago. It is completely AF. But, with your 70-300 - you're ok there. You might want to considar the other way 28mm - 52 (i think)

If you considar the fact hta it is a LENS.. They hardly ever loose their value. BUT, go to a pawn shop. You can get fabulous deals there.

marwene

_____________________________

Definition of COMPLIMENT:

Sometimes a matter of FACT --
More than not, a matter of TACT!

(in reply to Skribnod)

Post #: 7

RE: Pictures are too small..... - 4/27/2005 2:32:28 PM

Skribnod

Posts: 355
Joined: 10/22/2003
From: Cuba City, WI, USA
Status: offline

Thanks again.......didnt even think of a pawn shop. Great idea !!

_____________________________

And i thought it would be a inexpensive relaxing hobby.......

(in reply to marwen1)

Post #: 8

RE: Pictures are too small..... - 4/28/2005 9:40:18 PM

Which_way_is_up

Posts: 60
Joined: 5/29/2002
From: Carrollton, TX, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Skribnod

Since I am new to this digital SLR camera field could you also explain what the f4-5.6 stand for? Thanks a bunch.

That's the lowest fstop of the lens, in layman's terms it's sensitivity, how "fast the lens is", how much light it will pass, etc., the lower the number the "better" the lens and the more expensive it will be. The higher the number the slower your shutter speed will be and visa versa the lower the number the faster the shutter speed you can use for the same amount of light.

Didn't you say that you already had a 70-300mm len? If that's the case then you'll need something bigger then 300mm and if so you're starting to talk real big money. I've never owned a Nikon but with the cameras (35mm) that I've owned I've used an inexpensive doubler (2X) ring between the camera and lens to get the equivalent of 600mm. That was back before all these "auto focus" lens came out. So I don't know if there is such a thing as a doubler ring that is "autofocus" len compatible. Here again you have doubled your lowest fstop of the lens, which in this case was f4 and now with the doubler on it the lens is a f8. This won't be a problem as long as you're shoting in bright light, outdoors on a sunny day.

I hope that made sense and helped.

< Message edited by Which_way_is_up -- 4/28/2005 9:41:22 PM >

(in reply to Skribnod)

Post #: 9

RE: Pictures are too small..... - 4/29/2005 4:12:29 PM

marwen1

Posts: 772
Joined: 3/25/2004
From: WINNIPEGMB, CANADA
Status: offline

Skibnod

f/stops have 2 starting points: f/1.0 & f/1.4

Lenses are round and when we shoot with any lens,it MUST cover all 4 corners of a rectangle or square - as in the case of a 35mm negative or a 6cm x 6cm negative.

Assume that a lens can cover far more than thosedimentions. So much so that it covers up to 100%of all possible light. Consequently, your camera, at its maximum will only transmit the equivalent of an f/stop between f/4.0 & f/5.6

The smaller the f/stop the GREATER is the fraction of light going into your camera. The MORE time you will need.

Lets say you need f/4.0 @ 1/100sec. If you stop DOWN to f/5.6 - you cut the amount of light in half. therefore, you will need 2X the shutter speed (slower) 1/50sec.

For every stop you go DOWN, you divide your amount of light in half.

For every stop you go UP, you multiply the amount of light by 2X

Considar the f/stops to be a fraction.
i.e. 1÷ f/4.0 or 1/4
1÷ f/8.0 or 1/8

This is called: INVERSE SQUARE LAW

Thank goodness all of this stuff is done automatically, now!

I hope this answers your question about the numbers on face of your lens.

marwen

Attachments

Click to see fullsize image.

Click for fullsize

_____________________________

Definition of COMPLIMENT:

Sometimes a matter of FACT --
More than not, a matter of TACT!

(in reply to Which_way_is_up)

Post #: 10

RE: Pictures are too small..... - 4/29/2005 11:14:58 PM

Which_way_is_up

Posts: 60
Joined: 5/29/2002
From: Carrollton, TX, USA
Status: offline

Being a moderator has it's advantages.

(in reply to marwen1)

Post #: 11

RE: Pictures are too small..... - 11/29/2005 4:17:28 PM

fishkillbill

Posts: 20
Joined: 12/13/2002
From: NY
Status: offline

Just a question, why do you have the motor mounted sideways on the Big Stick?

Bill L

(in reply to Which_way_is_up)

Post #: 12

RE: Pictures are too small..... - 11/29/2005 5:50:32 PM

iacolb12

Posts: 386
Joined: 10/7/2004
From: Dallas, TX, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Skribnod

Since I am new to this digital SLR camera field could you also explain what the f4-5.6 stand for? Thanks a bunch.

quote:

That's the lowest fstop of the lens, in layman's terms it's sensitivity, how "fast the lens is", how much light it will pass, etc., the lower the number the "better" the lens and the more expensive it will be. The higher the number the slower your shutter speed will be and visa versa the lower the number the faster the shutter speed you can use for the same amount of light.

Didn't you say that you already had a 70-300mm len? If that's the case then you'll need something bigger then 300mm and if so you're starting to talk real big money. I've never owned a Nikon but with the cameras (35mm) that I've owned I've used an inexpensive doubler (2X) ring between the camera and lens to get the equivalent of 600mm. That was back before all these "auto focus" lens came out. So I don't know if there is such a thing as a doubler ring that is "autofocus" len compatible. Here again you have doubled your lowest fstop of the lens, which in this case was f4 and now with the doubler on it the lens is a f8. This won't be a problem as long as you're shoting in bright light, outdoors on a sunny day.

This may not apply to skibnod since he may not be looking to go fully manual. However, the Nikon D70 still uses the same bayonette mounting they have used for nearly 40 years. So, if one wanted to save big bucks, they could buy a manual Nikkor lens. However you would have to do manual light metering and focus. Whereas not all Nikon auto-focus lenses will work with that platform.

I say this becaus I've been considering a D70 and have a ton of lenses for my old Nikon FE that I still love and use today.

< Message edited by iacolb12 -- 11/29/2005 5:53:18 PM >

(in reply to Which_way_is_up)

Post #: 13

Page: [1]

All Forums >> Radios, Batteries, Clubhouse and more >> Digital Camera & Photo Editing >> Pictures are too small.....
Page: [1]

Jump to: