Professional Web Applications Themes

D70 resolution: 3008x2000 - what's the 8 all about - Photography

The D70 resolution is 3008x2000 pixels. What is the extra 8 pixels all about? Not that it matters I suppose, just curious....

  1. #1

    Default D70 resolution: 3008x2000 - what's the 8 all about

    The D70 resolution is 3008x2000 pixels.

    What is the extra 8 pixels all about?

    Not that it matters I suppose, just curious.
    paul Guest

  2. #2

    Default Re: D70 resolution: 3008x2000 - what's the 8 all about

    On Sat, 01 Jan 2005 14:37:27 -0800, paul wrote:
    > The D70 resolution is 3008x2000 pixels.
    >
    > What is the extra 8 pixels all about?
    >
    > Not that it matters I suppose, just curious.
    3000 isn't divisible by 16, 3008 is.

    The answer to your next question is to allow lossless rotation of JPEGs :-)

    --
    John Bean

    The most likely way for the world to be destroyed, most experts agree, is by
    accident. That's where we come in; we're computer professionals. We cause
    accidents (Nathaniel Borenstein)
    John Bean Guest

  3. #3

    Default Re: D70 resolution: 3008x2000 - what's the 8 all about

    paul wrote:
    > The D70 resolution is 3008x2000 pixels.
    >
    > What is the extra 8 pixels all about?
    >
    > Not that it matters I suppose, just curious.

    Why would you care? The Sony sensor used in the D70 doesn't have the 3:2
    ratio anyway. A 35mm film is 36mmx24mm. Sony's chip is 23.7mmx15.6mm and
    that makes the crop factor comes out to somewhere between 1.519x and
    1.538x. Just for comparison, Canon's sensor is 22.5mmx15mm which is
    exactly 1.6x.
    leo Guest

  4. #4

    Default Re: D70 resolution: 3008x2000 - what's the 8 all about

    In article <1ns37jweuk44d.dlgwaterfoot.net>,
    John Bean <waterfoot> wrote:
    > On Sat, 01 Jan 2005 14:37:27 -0800, paul wrote:
    >
    > > The D70 resolution is 3008x2000 pixels.
    > >
    > > What is the extra 8 pixels all about?
    > >
    > > Not that it matters I suppose, just curious.
    >
    > 3000 isn't divisible by 16, 3008 is.
    >
    > The answer to your next question is to allow lossless rotation of JPEGs :-)
    And MY next question is "How does 3008x2000 equate to the advertised 6.1
    megapixels?" Seems to me it should be 6.016 megapixels.

    Merritt
    Merritt Mullen Guest

  5. #5

    Default Re: D70 resolution: 3008x2000 - what's the 8 all about

    Merritt Mullen wrote:
    > In article <1ns37jweuk44d.dlgwaterfoot.net>,
    > John Bean <waterfoot> wrote:
    >
    >> On Sat, 01 Jan 2005 14:37:27 -0800, paul wrote:
    >>
    >>> The D70 resolution is 3008x2000 pixels.
    >>>
    >>> What is the extra 8 pixels all about?
    >>>
    >>> Not that it matters I suppose, just curious.
    >>
    >> 3000 isn't divisible by 16, 3008 is.
    >>
    >> The answer to your next question is to allow lossless rotation of
    >> JPEGs :-)
    >
    > And MY next question is "How does 3008x2000 equate to the advertised
    > 6.1 megapixels?" Seems to me it should be 6.016 megapixels.
    >
    > Merritt
    One presumes that marketing are allowed to round anything up!

    Actually 3008 x 2000 is:-

    6.016 million pixels

    5875 KP (if K = 1024)

    5.74MP (if M = 1024 x 1024)

    So if the computing definition of mega were used, the camera is only
    5.74MP!

    (Some people complained a while back that not all "128MB" CF cards had the
    same capacity, and indeed it seems that some manufacturers use the MB =
    1000000 bytes and other use MB = 1024 * 1024 bytes).

    Cheers,
    David


    David J Taylor Guest

  6. #6

    Default Re: D70 resolution: 3008x2000 - what's the 8 all about

    On Sun, 02 Jan 2005 03:37:09 GMT, Merritt Mullen wrote:
    > In article <1ns37jweuk44d.dlgwaterfoot.net>,
    > John Bean <waterfoot> wrote:
    >
    >> On Sat, 01 Jan 2005 14:37:27 -0800, paul wrote:
    >>
    >>> The D70 resolution is 3008x2000 pixels.
    >>>
    >>> What is the extra 8 pixels all about?
    >>>
    >>> Not that it matters I suppose, just curious.
    >>
    >> 3000 isn't divisible by 16, 3008 is.
    >>
    >> The answer to your next question is to allow lossless rotation of JPEGs :-)
    >
    > And MY next question is "How does 3008x2000 equate to the advertised 6.1
    > megapixels?" Seems to me it should be 6.016 megapixels.
    You'll have to ask the whoever writes the advertising copy ;-)

    FWIW my Pentax DS (with the same sensor) delivers 3008x2008 raw files, but
    crops JPEGs to 3008x2000.

    --
    John Bean

    In all large corporations, there is a pervasive fear that someone, somewhere
    is having fun with a computer on company time. Networks help alleviate that
    fear (John C. Dvorak)
    John Bean Guest

  7. #7

    Default Re: D70 resolution: 3008x2000 - what's the 8 all about

    In article <cr7nbn07msnews1.newsguy.com>, leo <someonesomewhere.net>
    wrote:
    > paul wrote:
    > > The D70 resolution is 3008x2000 pixels.
    > >
    > > What is the extra 8 pixels all about?
    > >
    > > Not that it matters I suppose, just curious.
    >
    >
    > Why would you care? The Sony sensor used in the D70 doesn't have the 3:2
    > ratio anyway. A 35mm film is 36mmx24mm. Sony's chip is 23.7mmx15.6mm and
    > that makes the crop factor comes out to somewhere between 1.519x and
    > 1.538x. Just for comparison, Canon's sensor is 22.5mmx15mm which is
    > exactly 1.6x.
    why post an answer if you are totally clueless?

    Lourens
    Lourens Smak Guest

  8. #8

    Default Re: D70 resolution: 3008x2000 - what's the 8 all about

    John Bean wrote:
    > On Sat, 01 Jan 2005 14:37:27 -0800, paul wrote:
    >
    >
    >>The D70 resolution is 3008x2000 pixels.
    >>
    >>What is the extra 8 pixels all about?
    >>
    >>Not that it matters I suppose, just curious.
    >
    >
    > 3000 isn't divisible by 16, 3008 is.
    >
    > The answer to your next question is to allow lossless rotation of JPEGs :-)
    Lossless rotation can be maintained by merely keeping the number of pixels the
    same, eg: 3000 x 1500 -> 1500 x 3000 (or whatever dimesnions you please).

    The 3008/16 is, as you imply, simply adopting the digital 'rounding' boundary
    that takes place with most digital devices.

    Cheers,
    Alan



    --
    -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: [url]http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm[/url]
    -- r.p.d.slr-systems: [url]http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm[/url]
    -- [SI] gallery & rulz: [url]http://www.pbase.com/shootin[/url]
    -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
    Alan Browne Guest

  9. #9

    Default Re: D70 resolution: 3008x2000 - what's the 8 all about

    In message <mmullen8014-808F42.19370901012005netnews.comcast.net>,
    Merritt Mullen <mmullen8014mchsi.com> wrote:
    >And MY next question is "How does 3008x2000 equate to the advertised 6.1
    >megapixels?" Seems to me it should be 6.016 megapixels.
    There is a border of RAW image data around the edges that most cameras
    making JPEGs or RAW converters will toss away in the process. There are
    also areas of pixels that are not exposed to light at all.
    --

    <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
    John P Sheehy <JPSno.komm>
    ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
    JPS@no.komm Guest

  10. #10

    Default Re: D70 resolution: 3008x2000 - what's the 8 all about

    Alan Browne wrote:
    []
    > Lossless rotation can be maintained by merely keeping the number of
    > pixels the same, eg: 3000 x 1500 -> 1500 x 3000 (or whatever
    > dimesnions you please).
    > The 3008/16 is, as you imply, simply adopting the digital 'rounding'
    > boundary that takes place with most digital devices.
    Alan, I think you will find that lossless rotation requires that the image
    dimensions be a multiple of 16 (and not 8 as I incorrectly stated
    earlier).

    Cheers,
    David


    David J Taylor Guest

  11. #11

    Default Re: D70 resolution: 3008x2000 - what's the 8 all about

    David J Taylor wrote:
    > Alan Browne wrote:
    > []
    >
    >>Lossless rotation can be maintained by merely keeping the number of
    >>pixels the same, eg: 3000 x 1500 -> 1500 x 3000 (or whatever
    >>dimesnions you please).
    >>The 3008/16 is, as you imply, simply adopting the digital 'rounding'
    >>boundary that takes place with most digital devices.
    >
    >
    > Alan, I think you will find that lossless rotation requires that the image
    > dimensions be a multiple of 16 (and not 8 as I incorrectly stated
    > earlier).
    I fail to understand why. A matrix of 7 x 11 has the same quantity of
    information as a matrix of 11 x 7. Assuming the rotation is correctly done (and
    after conversion of individual R,G,B sensor to RGB pixels) then it makes no
    matter at all.

    Cheers,
    Alan


    --
    -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: [url]http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm[/url]
    -- r.p.d.slr-systems: [url]http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm[/url]
    -- [SI] gallery & rulz: [url]http://www.pbase.com/shootin[/url]
    -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
    Alan Browne Guest

  12. #12

    Default Re: D70 resolution: 3008x2000 - what's the 8 all about

    Alan Browne wrote:
    > David J Taylor wrote:
    >
    >> Alan Browne wrote:
    >> []
    >>
    >>> Lossless rotation can be maintained by merely keeping the number of
    >>> pixels the same, eg: 3000 x 1500 -> 1500 x 3000 (or whatever
    >>> dimesnions you please).
    >>> The 3008/16 is, as you imply, simply adopting the digital 'rounding'
    >>> boundary that takes place with most digital devices.
    >>
    >>
    >> Alan, I think you will find that lossless rotation requires that the
    >> image dimensions be a multiple of 16 (and not 8 as I incorrectly
    >> stated earlier).
    >
    > I fail to understand why. A matrix of 7 x 11 has the same quantity of
    > information as a matrix of 11 x 7. Assuming the rotation is
    > correctly done (and after conversion of individual R,G,B sensor to
    > RGB pixels) then it makes no matter at all.
    If the image is JPEG, then the indivdual blocks are 16 x 16. The size
    quantisation restriction only applies to JPEG images, but of course almost
    all cameras do allow JPEG images as output.

    If the image is not JPEG then it can, of course, be losslessly rotated at
    any size - as you say.

    Cheers,
    David


    David J Taylor Guest

  13. #13

    Default Re: D70 resolution: 3008x2000 - what's the 8 all about


    "David J Taylor" <david-taylorinvalid.com> wrote in message
    news:33pumkF43rv61U1individual.net...
    > Merritt Mullen wrote:
    > > In article <1ns37jweuk44d.dlgwaterfoot.net>,
    > > John Bean <waterfoot> wrote:
    > >
    > >> On Sat, 01 Jan 2005 14:37:27 -0800, paul wrote:
    > >>
    > >>> The D70 resolution is 3008x2000 pixels.
    > >>>
    > >>> What is the extra 8 pixels all about?
    > >>>
    > >>> Not that it matters I suppose, just curious.
    > >>
    > >> 3000 isn't divisible by 16, 3008 is.
    > >>
    > >> The answer to your next question is to allow lossless rotation of
    > >> JPEGs :-)
    > >
    > > And MY next question is "How does 3008x2000 equate to the advertised
    > > 6.1 megapixels?" Seems to me it should be 6.016 megapixels.
    > >
    > > Merritt
    >
    > One presumes that marketing are allowed to round anything up!
    >
    > Actually 3008 x 2000 is:-
    >
    > 6.016 million pixels
    >
    > 5875 KP (if K = 1024)
    >
    > 5.74MP (if M = 1024 x 1024)
    >
    > So if the computing definition of mega were used, the camera is only
    > 5.74MP!
    >
    <rant>
    It seems mega has two different meanings, in storage it's 1,024x1,024. But
    in pixels it's the actual number. Same math my ISP uses for throughput speed
    ;) I also would prefer CF cards speeds be in mbps not 40X, 80X etc..
    </rant>


    Darrell Guest

  14. #14

    Default Re: D70 resolution: 3008x2000 - what's the 8 all about


    "Alan Browne" <alan.brownefreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
    news:cr99b9$lu1$1inews.gazeta.pl...
    > David J Taylor wrote:
    >
    > > Alan Browne wrote:
    > > []
    > >
    > >>Lossless rotation can be maintained by merely keeping the number of
    > >>pixels the same, eg: 3000 x 1500 -> 1500 x 3000 (or whatever
    > >>dimesnions you please).
    > >>The 3008/16 is, as you imply, simply adopting the digital 'rounding'
    > >>boundary that takes place with most digital devices.
    > >
    > >
    > > Alan, I think you will find that lossless rotation requires that the
    image
    > > dimensions be a multiple of 16 (and not 8 as I incorrectly stated
    > > earlier).
    >
    > I fail to understand why. A matrix of 7 x 11 has the same quantity of
    > information as a matrix of 11 x 7. Assuming the rotation is correctly
    done (and
    > after conversion of individual R,G,B sensor to RGB pixels) then it makes
    no
    > matter at all.
    >
    Are the photosites in the sensor grid perfect squares? a 7x11 grid of
    rectangles is not the same 7x11 as it would be at 11x7


    Darrell Guest

  15. #15

    Default Re: D70 resolution: 3008x2000 - what's the 8 all about

    Lourens Smak wrote:
    > In article <cr7nbn07msnews1.newsguy.com>, leo <someonesomewhere.net>
    > wrote:
    >
    >
    >>paul wrote:
    >>
    >>>The D70 resolution is 3008x2000 pixels.
    >>>
    >>>What is the extra 8 pixels all about?
    >>>
    >>>Not that it matters I suppose, just curious.
    >>
    >>
    >>Why would you care? The Sony sensor used in the D70 doesn't have the 3:2
    >>ratio anyway. A 35mm film is 36mmx24mm. Sony's chip is 23.7mmx15.6mm and
    >>that makes the crop factor comes out to somewhere between 1.519x and
    >>1.538x. Just for comparison, Canon's sensor is 22.5mmx15mm which is
    >>exactly 1.6x.
    >
    >
    > why post an answer if you are totally clueless?
    >
    > Lourens

    Why not. As the ratio indicates, there is more width info than height in
    the sensor (0.3mm wider). It might even translate into 8 pixels...
    leo Guest

  16. #16

    Default Re: D70 resolution: 3008x2000 - what's the 8 all about

    Darrell wrote:
    []
    > <rant>
    > It seems mega has two different meanings, in storage it's
    > 1,024x1,024. But in pixels it's the actual number. Same math my ISP
    > uses for throughput speed ;) I also would prefer CF cards speeds be
    > in mbps not 40X, 80X etc.. </rant>
    You will be delighted to hear that both my SanDisk Ultra II CF and my
    wife's Kingmax Platinum SD cards do indeed carry a read and write MB/s
    rating....

    David


    David J Taylor Guest

  17. #17

    Default Re: D70 resolution: 3008x2000 - what's the 8 all about

    On Sun, 2 Jan 2005 17:06:51 -0000, David J Taylor wrote:
    > Alan Browne wrote:
    >> David J Taylor wrote:
    >>
    >>> Alan Browne wrote:
    >>> []
    >>>
    >>>> Lossless rotation can be maintained by merely keeping the number of
    >>>> pixels the same, eg: 3000 x 1500 -> 1500 x 3000 (or whatever
    >>>> dimesnions you please).
    >>>> The 3008/16 is, as you imply, simply adopting the digital 'rounding'
    >>>> boundary that takes place with most digital devices.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Alan, I think you will find that lossless rotation requires that the
    >>> image dimensions be a multiple of 16 (and not 8 as I incorrectly
    >>> stated earlier).
    >>
    >> I fail to understand why. A matrix of 7 x 11 has the same quantity of
    >> information as a matrix of 11 x 7. Assuming the rotation is
    >> correctly done (and after conversion of individual R,G,B sensor to
    >> RGB pixels) then it makes no matter at all.
    >
    > If the image is JPEG, then the indivdual blocks are 16 x 16. The size
    > quantisation restriction only applies to JPEG images, but of course almost
    > all cameras do allow JPEG images as output.
    >
    > If the image is not JPEG then it can, of course, be losslessly rotated at
    > any size - as you say.
    Thank you David, exactly correct :-)

    --
    John Bean

    Why is it drug addicts and computer afficionados are both called users?
    (Clifford Stoll)
    John Bean Guest

  18. #18

    Default Re: D70 resolution: 3008x2000 - what's the 8 all about

    leo <someonesomewhere.net> wrote in news:cr9d56021ptnews3.newsguy.com:
    > Why not. As the ratio indicates, there is more width info than height in
    > the sensor (0.3mm wider). It might even translate into 8 pixels...
    The correct answer is already given. 3008 is possible to divide by 16.
    Thats it - nothing more to see here - please move along.


    /Roland
    Roland Karlsson Guest

  19. #19

    Default Re: D70 resolution: 3008x2000 - what's the 8 all about

    David J Taylor wrote:
    > Alan Browne wrote:
    >
    >>David J Taylor wrote:
    >>>Alan, I think you will find that lossless rotation requires that the
    >>>image dimensions be a multiple of 16 (and not 8 as I incorrectly
    >>>stated earlier).
    >>
    >>I fail to understand why. A matrix of 7 x 11 has the same quantity of
    >>information as a matrix of 11 x 7. Assuming the rotation is
    >>correctly done (and after conversion of individual R,G,B sensor to
    >>RGB pixels) then it makes no matter at all.
    >
    >
    > If the image is JPEG, then the indivdual blocks are 16 x 16. The size
    > quantisation restriction only applies to JPEG images, but of course almost
    > all cameras do allow JPEG images as output.
    >
    > If the image is not JPEG then it can, of course, be losslessly rotated at
    > any size - as you say.
    Now I'm really confused. Nothing prevents me from editing a JPG image to 1
    pixel in either dimension. I can easilly come out with a 111 x 213 pixel image
    in JPG. From there, I can rotate it to 213 x 111 and it contains the same info.
    I can then save it at full quality. I've lost nothing.

    Getting back on track, the reason we end up with 3008x2000, IMO, (D70, Maxxum
    7d, et al) is that the hardware and software can be designed in even boundaries
    of 16 (or 8) and that is convenient to the engineers in terms of performace/$.

    --
    -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: [url]http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm[/url]
    -- r.p.d.slr-systems: [url]http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm[/url]
    -- [SI] gallery & rulz: [url]http://www.pbase.com/shootin[/url]
    -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
    Alan Browne Guest

  20. #20

    Default Re: D70 resolution: 3008x2000 - what's the 8 all about

    Darrell wrote:
    > "Alan Browne" <alan.brownefreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
    > news:cr99b9$lu1$1inews.gazeta.pl...
    >
    >>David J Taylor wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>Alan Browne wrote:
    >>>[]
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Lossless rotation can be maintained by merely keeping the number of
    >>>>pixels the same, eg: 3000 x 1500 -> 1500 x 3000 (or whatever
    >>>>dimesnions you please).
    >>>>The 3008/16 is, as you imply, simply adopting the digital 'rounding'
    >>>>boundary that takes place with most digital devices.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>Alan, I think you will find that lossless rotation requires that the
    >
    > image
    >
    >>>dimensions be a multiple of 16 (and not 8 as I incorrectly stated
    >>>earlier).
    >>
    >>I fail to understand why. A matrix of 7 x 11 has the same quantity of
    >>information as a matrix of 11 x 7. Assuming the rotation is correctly
    >
    > done (and
    >
    >>after conversion of individual R,G,B sensor to RGB pixels) then it makes
    >
    > no
    >
    >>matter at all.
    >>
    >
    > Are the photosites in the sensor grid perfect squares? a 7x11 grid of
    > rectangles is not the same 7x11 as it would be at 11x7
    On the sensor in the D70 and Maxxum 7d I'm not sure they are really perfect
    squares. The data on dpreview suggests perhaps not. (pixel dimensions v.
    sensor dimensions. It's not clear what is 'cropped' by the camera when reading
    the device).

    In the Canon 20D they do appear to be square..


    --
    -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: [url]http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm[/url]
    -- r.p.d.slr-systems: [url]http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm[/url]
    -- [SI] gallery & rulz: [url]http://www.pbase.com/shootin[/url]
    -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
    Alan Browne Guest

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. resolution of a PDF
    By katie_schumack@adobeforums.com in forum Adobe Acrobat Macintosh
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: November 8th, 10:24 PM
  2. Resolution?
    By Spako in forum Macromedia Director Basics
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: February 17th, 05:26 PM
  3. Get JPG Resolution in ASP
    By Sylvian Tam in forum ASP
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: October 11th, 10:43 PM
  4. available resolution
    By Frank Caerter in forum Macromedia Director Lingo
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: September 18th, 09:38 AM
  5. DPI vc resolution
    By Ilia Poliakov in forum Photography
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: July 15th, 02:03 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139