is there anyway of adding pixels to a digital photo? i was sent this through email that i want to get enlarged to something around 3x2 or more. the kinkos lady said that when she did that it gets really pixely and that i need a picture with more DPI and just a better file.


i am assuming the email may have resized the file? if it turns out the actual image file that my friend sent me has the same properties as the one on her computer, is there anything i can to do make the enlargement less pixely?

Youseff wrote:HDR sucks

I don't care for most HDR stuff, but when well done it can make an image that comes closer to what the eye sees in a scene than a camera can reproduce without help.

CalvinBall wrote:is there anyway of adding pixels to a digital photo? i was sent this through email that i want to get enlarged to something around 3x2 or more. the kinkos lady said that when she did that it gets really pixely and that i need a picture with more DPI and just a better file.


i am assuming the email may have resized the file? if it turns out the actual image file that my friend sent me has the same properties as the one on her computer, is there anything i can to do make the enlargement less pixely?

3x2 inches? It shouldn't take much to do a 3"x2" print. What was the resolution of the original (i.e. X pixels by Y pixels)?

Assuming you have no way of getting a higher-resolution source file, there are interpolation algorithms that will produce a smoother result than simply doubling the pixels or whatever, but none of these can make these files more detailed than they were to start with.

3 by 2 feet or more.

right now the image i have is only 604x453 pixels. i have to imagine that the camera took a better picture than that and that i was just sent the wrong file. i am waiting to hear back from my friend to see if she can get me a higher res image.

CalvinBall wrote:3 by 2 feet or more.

right now the image i have is only 604x453 pixels. i have to imagine that the camera took a better picture than that and that i was just sent the wrong file. i am waiting to hear back from my friend to see if she can get me a higher res image.

Yeah, that's pretty low resolution for a newer camera. With a quick google, I find this as the rec's for a print that size: 24" x 36" 1440x2160. I think you could probably get this with a 5 megapixel or better camera.

CalvinBall wrote:

CalvinBall wrote:is there anyway of adding pixels to a digital photo? i was sent this through email that i want to get enlarged to something around 3x2 or more. the kinkos lady said that when she did that it gets really pixely and that i need a picture with more DPI and just a better file.


i am assuming the email may have resized the file? if it turns out the actual image file that my friend sent me has the same properties as the one on her computer, is there anything i can to do make the enlargement less pixely?

3 by 2 feet or more.

right now the image i have is only 604x453 pixels. i have to imagine that the camera took a better picture than that and that i was just sent the wrong file. i am waiting to hear back from my friend to see if she can get me a higher res image.

Well, you can try converting it to a vector image before resizing it to a suitable (bigger) resolution. I haven't tried any of these yet, so YMMV...

http://www.ehow.com/how_4421430_convert-jpeg-vector-image.html

I think http://vectormagic.com has a way to do it online for free.

According to here...

Unlike raster images, vector drawings are made of geometric shapes instead of pixels, so you can infinitely resize them with no fuzzy or blockiness! This makes them ideal for blowing up a small photo to, say, the size of your bedroom wall.

MrsVox wrote:

CalvinBall wrote:3 by 2 feet or more.

right now the image i have is only 604x453 pixels. i have to imagine that the camera took a better picture than that and that i was just sent the wrong file. i am waiting to hear back from my friend to see if she can get me a higher res image.

Yeah, that's pretty low resolution for a newer camera. With a quick google, I find this as the rec's for a print that size: 24" x 36" 1440x2160. I think you could probably get this with a 5 megapixel or better camera.

1440x2160 is actually only 3 megapixel. Blowing that up to 3'x2' would be a stretch. If you looked at the resultant print up close it would be noticeable pixelated, but if you're just doing a poster or something and nobody's going to get closer than five feet or so, 1440x2160 is probably adequate.

phatj wrote:

MrsVox wrote:

CalvinBall wrote:3 by 2 feet or more.

right now the image i have is only 604x453 pixels. i have to imagine that the camera took a better picture than that and that i was just sent the wrong file. i am waiting to hear back from my friend to see if she can get me a higher res image.

Yeah, that's pretty low resolution for a newer camera. With a quick google, I find this as the rec's for a print that size: 24" x 36" 1440x2160. I think you could probably get this with a 5 megapixel or better camera.

1440x2160 is actually only 3 megapixel. Blowing that up to 3'x2' would be a stretch. If you looked at the resultant print up close it would be noticeable pixelated, but if you're just doing a poster or something and nobody's going to get closer than five feet or so, 1440x2160 is probably adequate.

more googling than I was going to commit...

The three horsemen patiently wait for their foursome to be completed just off Rittenhouse Square.

EndlessSummer wrote:
The three horsemen patiently wait for their foursome to be completed just off Rittenhouse Square.

Nice job. Lovely pic.

some B&Ws from Ridley Creek Park

Those are great.

Yeah, I like the first one especially.

I ain't gone picture-taking in awhile, but there is some impressive stuff in this thread, especially from phatj, Warszawa, and momadance. It's inspiring me to pick up my camera again.

Thanks, moz.

Here's a few from the weekend. Winter is losing its grip.

Just ordered some new glass for my trip to Mexico. Picking up the Olympus 14-54mm f/2.8-3.5 II Zuiko. Titties.

I was digging through some photos from my honeymoon, before I got sort of serious about photography. These were all taken with a crappy 2-megapixel Nikon point-and-shoot but if you don't look too close some are pretty nice (though they've all had a little help).

Wizard Island in Crater Lake:


Another view of Crater Lake:


A view away from the caldera of Crater Lake:


Giant redwoods:


Typical Oregon coast beach:


Shore Acres State Park:


A sunset over Coos Bay, Ore:


Another sunset in almost exactly the same spot, but at a later time and facing a different direction obviously:

Took the new glass down to the OC Boardwalk this morning...