
|

When Digital
Film Isn't Film
Does
it make a difference in picture quality if we use the non-branded (cheaper
versions) of memory cards? Are the super-speed SD better than the normal
SD?
It has become a convenience to refer to memory cards as “digital
film,” but that analogy falls apart quickly in one area: picture
quality. Sit at a table with a few film photographers, start asking about
the best film, and you’ll hear lengthy discussions about Fujichrome
Velvia’s color rendition or Kodak Ektachrome’s tonal range.
Sit at a table with a group of photographers shooting digital, ask about
memory cards, and you might hear discussions about reliability or write
speed, but nothing regarding picture quality (if you do, move to a different
table, fast).
In short, there’s no difference in picture quality between the cards;
they’re simply storage devices for image data. Once the camera processes
the image (whether a lot with JPEG or minimal with RAW), it’s just
writing data onto the card. There isn’t such a thing as a high-resolution
card or a low image-noise card.
Cards vary as to reliability and how well they work under different conditions,
however. Certain memory cards are rated for use under very hot or cold
conditions—for example, conditions beyond the normal range of card
use. Branded cards, as a whole, are very reliable, and you can count on
them working and not failing on you.
Card speed has no affect on image quality or a camera’s speed of
taking pictures. Card speed refers to how fast a memory card can move
images from the camera’s buffer to the card. Whether it makes any
difference to your camera really depends on whether the camera can take
advantage of the higher-speed cards. Most small digital cameras can’t
write quickly to a memory card, so card speed has little effect. High-end
digital SLRs are definitely affected by card speed, but they also have
large buffers, so card speed affects how many images can be taken by the
camera before the camera has to stop to catch up on recording files from
the buffer to the card.
Caught In The
RAW
I
accidentally took digital pictures in the RAW format and now I’m having
a hard time doing anything with them. I used the RAW image converter for
my camera and converted them to TIFF, but I still can’t e-mail them
in that format.
Many
cameras offer an image quality setting for storing images called RAW.
RAW files offer some advantages as far as changing white balance after
the fact and can allow for greater control of the image processing. Unfortu-nately,
this all comes at a price.
Unlike JPEGs or TIFFs, the RAW file format isn’t a standard. It’s
not even the same among a few manufacturers, so even if you tried e-mailing
them, the people receiving the photos probably wouldn’t be able
to view them.
There’s more. Since there’s not much in-camera processing
on RAW images, they may require processing in an image editor before they
look good. The files aren’t compressed, so they take up much more
room on your memory card. And they will take longer to write to a memory
card.
Luckily, many popular image-processing programs will be able to take your
RAW file and save it as a TIFF or JPEG file. Most image editors also have
a batch function that will take a whole folder of images and create copies
in the format you need. You also should be able to use the batch function
to convert your TIFF files to compressed JPEG for e-mailing.
Making It On Television
I’ve
been trying to make a slideshow on a VCD of the pictures taken from a digital
camera so that my family can view it on the TV using a DVD player. The problem
I’m facing is the loss in the picture quality when viewing the same
images on a TV; the pictures when viewed on the computer are sharp and clear,
but when I create a VCD and test-run to see them on the TV, the pictures
aren’t as clear and are choppy.
|
Navin Nawani
Bangkok, Thailand
|
The image
quality problem you’re having is caused by the fact that VCDs use
a low-resolution format. Consider a typical computer setup (if there’s
such a thing as “typical”). The display resolution may be
set to 1024 x 768 or even higher, and your display may be 17 or 19 inches
measured diagonally.
Believe it or not, a VCD image size is only 352 x 240 in NTSC (the television
standard used in the United States) and 352 x 288 for PAL (the standard
used in many other countries). That’s approximately one-tenth or
less of the computer screen resolution. When you convert your images for
recording to a VCD, you’re immediately throwing away at least 90%
of your resolution. You have no choice because of the format. Then you’re
blowing up the image to display it on a TV screen—probably larger
than your computer monitor. You can see, then, why the image quality suffers!
A Super VCD (SVCD) might be an option for you, provided that your friends
and family have a player. The SVCD standard is still only 480 x 480 in
NTSC and 480 x 576 for PAL, but it eliminates some of the scaling artifacts
you’re noticing.
Another approach is to use DVD. Its higher-resolution format—720
x 486 NTSC or 480 x 576 PAL—is still smaller than your computer’s
screen resolution, but this now takes advantage of all a standard TV can
handle. The drawbacks are that DVDs require software to author the disc
and need to be played on a DVD player or a computer’s DVD drive.
ƒ-Stop
Exposé
Is
there an optimum aperture to use for composing landscape images with a digital
camera?
The aperture
is a camera setting that adjusts the amount of light reaching your image
sensor. The aperture, measured in ƒ-stops, is controlled by the iris
(a part of the lens with a variable opening, just like the iris in your
eye). A wider opening of the iris is represented by a smaller ƒ-stop
number, so a set-ting of ƒ/4 would have a larger opening and let
in more light than an ƒ/16 setting (a larger opening also is called
a faster aperture).
Before deciding which aperture to use for landscape images, you must consider
depth of field, which usually is defined as the distance from front to
back in which the objects in the scene are in focus. In reality, there’s
only one plane that’s in focus, but the depth of field is the range
in front of and behind that focus plane that’s acceptably sharp
in a photograph.
What kind of depth of field do you want? That is, how much of the image
do you want to be in focus? If you want as much in focus as possible,
use a smaller aperture such as ƒ/11, ƒ/16 or higher (ƒ/8
for advanced compact cameras; they often don’t have smaller ƒ-stops,
but because of their lens’ size, depth of field is still very high).
Smaller apertures increase depth of field. (It can be confusing to think
of a smaller aperture as requiring a larger ƒ-stop number; however,
the ƒ-stop actually is a fraction. (If you’re not good with
fractions, just remember that the higher the number, the smaller the opening
and the deeper the depth of field.) To limit depth of field and throw
more of the foreground or background out of focus, use a large aperture
(a smaller ƒ-stop number).
If you have any questions, please send them to HelpLine, PCPhoto
Magazine, 12121 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 1200, Los Angeles, CA 90025 or
[email protected].Visit
our Website at www.pcphotomag.com
for past HelpLine columns.
|

|