300dpi Camera?

DPI is equivalent to PPI only when printing in B&W. But when printing in color, DPI should be 4x the PPI density if every pixel is to be resolved. This is because a color printer basically mixes 4 dots of different ink colors (including black) per pixel.

imbsysop wrote:

mamallama wrote:

tom29 wrote:

Does anyone know if or when Canon will be coming out with a digital
camera that finally outputs at 300dpi instead of 180dpi?

tom29:

You have gotten a lot of responses regarding how inappropriate your
question is but here is a simple explanation of the situation.

Insofar as the resolution of the camera is concerned, all that
matters is the number of pixels (dots, if you will) across and the
number of pixels down. Your printing software will distribute those
pixels across and down to create an image of the particular size
you set. Of course, the larger the image, the less dots per inch
(dpi) you will have. (Imagine a window screen that you can squeeze
and stretch and how the size of the openings get smaller as you
squeeze).

I hope this simple explanation is clear.

To answer your question, virtually all Canon cameras can now
produce 300 dpi output images. The 8 megapixel Pro1 with 3264 x
2448 pixels can produce an 10" x 8" image with 300 dpi. 300 dpi
images for most other Canon digicams would have to be smaller.

although yr explanation is absolutely correct you are obscuring it
again by putting out that last paragraph .. Cameras NEVER put
out a "DPI" image they output an XbyY pixelmap (the dpi value given
is useless) .. The dpi is a user applied & choosen pixel density
for printing AND the exact connotation is PPI (pixels per inch).
The DPI definition is purely printer based aka a 300PPI choice to
define print size & printed on a printer at 300 DPI will yield an
absolutely lousy print ...
Even the Adobe people do not seem to get this "nuance" ...
FWIW

imbsysop wrote:

Medic Laviña wrote:

DPI is equivalent to PPI only when printing in B&W. But when
printing in color, DPI should be 4x the PPI density if every pixel
is to be resolved. This is because a color printer basically mixes
4 dots of different ink colors (including black) per pixel.

sorry but that is absolutely NOT correct ..

PPI and DPI have nothing! to do with each other ...
ad nauseam .. PPI is an arbitrary pixel density set by the user to
define the maximum printsize he/she will get on the paper ..
(example 3072x2304 aka 7Mpx picture at 300PPI -> 3072/300=10.24

Correct. But PPI is not equivalent to DPI as you described on your previous post.

inch largest length for printing, same for other dimension, notice
it has nothing to do with DPI! on the printer!)

Now you're contradicting yourself.

DPI is just the dot density that the printer is able to produce ..
modern printer have 2400, 4800 or even beyond that DPI .. (LPI
printers is another story ..)

The 4x factor you are giving is not very relevant because a)
several printers mix more than 3colors+black and it all depends on

That's not the point. I was just describing the difference between DPI and PPI, which you described on your previous post as the same thing. Let me quote what you've said:

"The dpi is a user applied & choosen pixel density for printing AND the exact connotation is PPI (pixels per inch). The DPI definition is purely printer based aka a 300PPI choice to define print size..."

imbsysop wrote:

mamallama wrote:

imbsysop wrote:

mamallama wrote:

tom29 wrote:

Does anyone know if or when Canon will be coming out with a digital
camera that finally outputs at 300dpi instead of 180dpi?

tom29:

You have gotten a lot of responses regarding how inappropriate your
question is but here is a simple explanation of the situation.

Insofar as the resolution of the camera is concerned, all that
matters is the number of pixels (dots, if you will) across and the
number of pixels down. Your printing software will distribute those
pixels across and down to create an image of the particular size
you set. Of course, the larger the image, the less dots per inch
(dpi) you will have. (Imagine a window screen that you can squeeze
and stretch and how the size of the openings get smaller as you
squeeze).

I hope this simple explanation is clear.

To answer your question, virtually all Canon cameras can now
produce 300 dpi output images. The 8 megapixel Pro1 with 3264 x
2448 pixels can produce an 10" x 8" image with 300 dpi. 300 dpi
images for most other Canon digicams would have to be smaller.

although yr explanation is absolutely correct you are obscuring it
again by putting out that last paragraph .. Cameras NEVER put
out a "DPI" image they output an XbyY pixelmap (the dpi value given
is useless) .. The dpi is a user applied & choosen pixel density
for printing AND the exact connotation is PPI (pixels per inch).
The DPI definition is purely printer based aka a 300PPI choice to
define print size & printed on a printer at 300 DPI will yield an
absolutely lousy print ...
Even the Adobe people do not seem to get this "nuance" ...
FWIW

imbsyop:

You are semantically correct. In my effort to simplify the
explanation I did cloud the issue somewhat. A more careful
description should read:

To answer your question, tom29, virtually all Canon cameras can now
produce image files that will print 300 dpi images. The 8 megapixel
Pro1 can produce a 3264 x 2448 pixel image file from which a 10" x
8" image with 300 dpi can be printed. The 300 dpi images made using
the files produced by Canon digicams with less megapixels would
have to be smaller.

With all of our explanations, I hope tom29 isn't more confused.

I hope not

The problem is, that although a lot of people consider it to be
only "semantics", people not wanting to stick to the correct
definitions. It could avoid all the mixup The presumed
pixelcount for printsize calculations should refered to as PPI
while the printing resolution remains at DPI ... This way it will
never cause discrepancies ..

Wow! I should really check this forum more often! Thanks for all of your responses!! Great info.

My original question stemmed from the fact that I always find myself having to "bump up" the resolution of my photos if I am using them for a print ad. They only come into Photoshop at 180dpi, not 300dpi which is what I need. I understand that bumping them up" from 180dpi creates good results that are not pixelated, but bumping them up from a 72dpi image would not look so sharp (just to clairify a previous post). I just thought that if most people have the desire to PRINT their digital images in the future, shouldn't Canon come out with a camera that outputs at the standard PRINTER resolution instead of us having to bump them up all the time? Does anyone know if the EOS 20D offers this resolution?
Thanks again!
Cheers!

Your camera shoots at 300 dpi and ANY dpi all at the same time. Take one of your images from camera and open it up in Adobe PS or PSE. Go to "image size" and uncheck resample image, leaving constrain proportions checked. In resolution type in 300 dpi. Now you have your 300dpi image from camera. Nothing has really changed except the image size. I have them set to inches. Same file size etc.

tom29 wrote:

imbsysop wrote:

mamallama wrote:

imbsysop wrote:

mamallama wrote:

tom29 wrote:

Does anyone know if or when Canon will be coming out with a digital
camera that finally outputs at 300dpi instead of 180dpi?

tom29:

You have gotten a lot of responses regarding how inappropriate your
question is but here is a simple explanation of the situation.

Insofar as the resolution of the camera is concerned, all that
matters is the number of pixels (dots, if you will) across and the
number of pixels down. Your printing software will distribute those
pixels across and down to create an image of the particular size
you set. Of course, the larger the image, the less dots per inch
(dpi) you will have. (Imagine a window screen that you can squeeze
and stretch and how the size of the openings get smaller as you
squeeze).

I hope this simple explanation is clear.

To answer your question, virtually all Canon cameras can now
produce 300 dpi output images. The 8 megapixel Pro1 with 3264 x
2448 pixels can produce an 10" x 8" image with 300 dpi. 300 dpi
images for most other Canon digicams would have to be smaller.

although yr explanation is absolutely correct you are obscuring it
again by putting out that last paragraph .. Cameras NEVER put
out a "DPI" image they output an XbyY pixelmap (the dpi value given
is useless) .. The dpi is a user applied & choosen pixel density
for printing AND the exact connotation is PPI (pixels per inch).
The DPI definition is purely printer based aka a 300PPI choice to
define print size & printed on a printer at 300 DPI will yield an
absolutely lousy print ...
Even the Adobe people do not seem to get this "nuance" ...
FWIW

imbsyop:

You are semantically correct. In my effort to simplify the
explanation I did cloud the issue somewhat. A more careful
description should read:

To answer your question, tom29, virtually all Canon cameras can now
produce image files that will print 300 dpi images. The 8 megapixel
Pro1 can produce a 3264 x 2448 pixel image file from which a 10" x
8" image with 300 dpi can be printed. The 300 dpi images made using
the files produced by Canon digicams with less megapixels would
have to be smaller.

With all of our explanations, I hope tom29 isn't more confused.

I hope not

The problem is, that although a lot of people consider it to be
only "semantics", people not wanting to stick to the correct
definitions. It could avoid all the mixup The presumed
pixelcount for printsize calculations should refered to as PPI
while the printing resolution remains at DPI ... This way it will
never cause discrepancies ..

Wow! I should really check this forum more often! Thanks for all of
your responses!! Great info.
My original question stemmed from the fact that I always find
myself having to "bump up" the resolution of my photos if I am
using them for a print ad. They only come into Photoshop at 180dpi,
not 300dpi which is what I need. I understand that bumping them up"
from 180dpi creates good results that are not pixelated, but
bumping them up from a 72dpi image would not look so sharp (just to
clairify a previous post). I just thought that if most people have
the desire to PRINT their digital images in the future, shouldn't
Canon come out with a camera that outputs at the standard PRINTER
resolution instead of us having to bump them up all the time? Does
anyone know if the EOS 20D offers this resolution?
Thanks again!
Cheers!

hunter

imbsysop wrote:

JWP wrote:

Your camera shoots at 300 dpi and ANY dpi all at the same time.

SIGH !! cameras DO NOT shoot at DPI !! not even PPI .. !

Umm... that's what he was saying... albeit perhaps in a confusing way. Although it did not confuse me. In any case, we need to stop freaking out about DPI because that was NOT the point of the original post. The originally poster (as evidenced by subsiquent posts) knows all about dpi and it's relavance to printing and irrelivance to a camera or computer. He is NOT confused about DPI and pixels and PPI etc. and does NOT required education on the matter. The POINT is that when you bring an image from your camera into Photoshop and open the Image Size dialog box, it's document size (for printing purposed) is always set, for whatever reason, to a resolution of 180dpi. He, and probably others, find it a pain to have to go in and change it all the time. He wants to know if there are any cameras which set the DPI (which is just an EXIF attribute and we all KNOW it has nothing to do with the resolution of the image on screen) to 300. Perhaps there should be an option in the camera menus to set that tag to a custom value if you want your images to come into Photoshop TAGGED as 72 or 300 or whatever dpi you want. And before you all jump to reply, I KNOW that changing the EXIF tag to 72 or 300 would have no effect on the resolution (number of pixels) of my shoots. It would just be a convenience thing so you don't have to always go into Photoshop and change that setting before importing the image into your InDesign or Quark document or whatever you're doing with the image.

This has already been pointed out... ad nauseum.

Yes, my old 2 megapixel camera would print a 4 X 6 at 300 dpi.

mamallama wrote:

Insightful. Thank you!

Welcome back Needlens!

Nice job bumping this thread up.

👍🏽