Would you call this pixel peeping:

Started 10 months ago | Discussions thread
Prognathous
Veteran MemberPosts: 8,700
Like?
Re: I have both :-)
In reply to Wayne Larmon, 10 months ago

Wayne Larmon wrote:

You are defining a problem that has no easy solution. In this post, you say that you need to zoom and pan in order to provide a more "compelling presentation". But in your original post, you said

I use the same technique people use when pixel peeping (100% magnification), and if image quality is lacking it's tough for me not to notice it, though I don't tend to point to technical shortcomings.

It appears that you need a substantial upgrade to your equipment (FF camera with professional quality lenses, etc. Or to medium format, if you are now using FF.), so that when you zoom images enough to show the details you need to show, that they won't show "technical shortcomings."

Note that I wrote "if image quality is lacking it's tough for me not to notice it". Image quality is normally more than fine, and if the picture was taken at daylight there's usually nothing for me to even nitpick about. In short, I only mentioned this aspect to demonstrate that magnifying images for presentation can have pixel peeping aspects to it, even if this is not the original intention. Personally I'm fine with it and don't intend to stop using "magnified presentation" for some of my pictures, but I was curious to hear other people's point of view about this practice. Whether the name people prefer to use for it is "magnified presentation" or "pixel peeping" doesn't really change what it's all about for me.

Or you could do what I do. When I have an image that I know contains detail that warrants zooming, I make a copy and crop enough so that the detail is apparent when displayed full screen. (I don't crop so much that the image will end up at 100% when displayed on a two megapixel 1080P HDTV. That is a lot of cropping. Or zooming.) And then save the copy with a slightly different name. This way there is no zooming during the presentation. And it works when the images are printed as 4x6s.

A simpler solution which I employ if the image quality is sub-optimal is to use 50% magnification. Works like charm

But if you want to have your cake and eat it too (be able to zoom and pan without exhibiting technical shortcomings), you need to upgrade your equipment. No?

It turns out I don't have to upgrade. I'm really happy with the image quality I'm getting from the A77 and my assortment of lenses and have no plan to move to FF in the foreseeable future.

Prog.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
NoNew
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow