I've been trying out my Nikon 950. I used the highest setting (I set it to 'Hi' and only one picture). But, when I opened the picture it said the resolution was 300ppi. I thought the resolution was supposed to be much higher. Is there a trick that I don't know about to get a higher resolution? THANKS! Brenda

-- Brenda (bfrymire@home.net), May 22, 1999

Answers

I think you're talking about setting the camera to get the largest image file size. The PPI figure only applies as a measure of how many pixels are being rendered per inch, typically for printing. If you check the file info in your editing program you'll no doubt find the image size is set to the values you expected. The PPI can be manipulated higher or lower to get different prints sizes, or in some programs you set the print size and the PPI changes to match.

-- Gerald Payne (gmp@francorp.francomm.com), May 22, 1999.

What is so wierd is when I check the image size it is HUGE. Both in Photoshop and in the image program that came with the camera. It shows as an actual size of more than 22 inches. If I try to print only a small portion of the picture prints and the rest is off the page. If I manually shrink the size to say 4x6, the image is smaller, but the dpi after it's printed is the same as any 300dpi picture. No difference between the max and regular. (printer set at 1440dpi on photo paper) BUT...I had an idea. I'm using SanDisk's Imagemate to copy the images from the camera card to my computer via my USB connection. I am simply selecting them off the card and copying them to my machine. Could there be some sort of conversion that is supposed to be happening to decrease the actual image size while increasing the ppi? I know it just can't be right. Brenda

-- Brenda (bfrymire@home.net), May 23, 1999.

Uncheck the "resample" checkbox in Photoshop's Image Size dialogue window. That way you can reset the Print dimensions without throwing away (or adding/interpolating) pixels. More practice with pixel-based imaging will make this more clear to you. The bottom line is file size (5.5mb in this case) and whether jpeg compression has been used to create the file.

-- Dixon Wolf (dixonaw@aol.com), May 23, 1999.

Brenda,

I think Dixon has the right idea, you're resampling to a smaller image instead of just changing the PPI or DPI values. Resampling will change the actual size of the image; thereby lowering the resolution in your case. What you want to do is change the size that the image is rendered at on the output device. The image size expressed in pixels is a constant unless you resample it and change the actual size of the image. However, the apparent size of the image, the size it's rendered at, is fluid and easily changed by affecting the PPI or DPI values.

Your image seems to be(displays as) 22" wide because most Windows systems are set up with the monitor set to 72 DPI. If you take a 1600 pixel wide image and display or print it at 72 DPI you get a 22" wide image. 1600 pixels / 72 DPI(or PPI) = 22.22" What you really need to do is read the manuals for the two software packages and you'll discover the correct way to set the PPI in order to print an image at the size you prefer. I know, "Read the manual?", but that's sometimes the only way. :-) You could try selecting the help function in the software and searching for "printing" or "print size" or something to that effect and perhaps you'll find a mini-tutorial or some brief instructions on how to accomplish your goals. Good Luck.

-- Gerald Payne (gmp@francorp.francomm.com), May 23, 1999.

This is sort of off the subject, but you stated you downloaded your pictures over a USB connection. I thought the 950 did not have a USB capability. What is the story? And by the way, how do you like the camera and your pictures?

-- Larry Segil (ljsegil@aol.com), May 24, 1999.

You guys are great. You nailed it. I up'd the resolution to 1440, that shrank the picture. So, I then increased the picture size by 400% and got about a 4x6 picture. The picture was huge (90mb), but it turned out amazing. Wish there were less steps, but it was pretty easy once I figured out what you were telling me.

Larry, As far as the USB connection, I cheated a little ;-) I bought the ImageMate by Sandisk that just reads the card from the camera. But, they also have conversion kits that will allow you to plug a serial connection to a USB port. If I had it to do over, I would probably try this route. The complactflash door on the 950 seems so fragile, that I hate to open it more than I have to. Now that I've figured out how to get the resolution it's supposed to have (thanks again guys) I'm thrilled with the camera! Brenda

-- Brenda (bfrymire@home.net), May 24, 1999.