Why does the file size vs pixel numbers still persist?

Started 10 months ago | Discussions thread
ForumParentFirstPrevious
Flat view
image360by180 Junior Member • Posts: 28
Why does the file size vs pixel numbers still persist?

I got a request for at least a 100 megabyte file recently from a partner, the HP rep at a conference showing off a 600 dpi printer insisted that they needed at least a 100 megabyte file to produce full quality prints from the new printer.

I sent a series of 25 to 35 megabyte jpeg files, quality 11, and he complained about the file size as not being good enough. But the pixels were in the the range of 16,000 wide to 36,000.

They printed great, amazing details . My partner was finally convinced that it's all about the number of pixels and bit depth vs file size.

But yet this fallacy continues to exist, even with one of my friends that teaches photography as a professor at a local college.

Why is it so hard to understand that for print and most uses a 8 bit high quality jpeg at 35 megabytes is simply as good as a 200 megabyte tiff.

Ultimately, it's all about the number of pixels given the same bit depth and very limited use of compression.

ForumParentFirstPrevious
Flat view
ForumParentFirstPrevious
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow