Hi Res JPEG..?

Tyler138

Tyler138

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,320
Name
Alex Tyler
Edit My Images
Yes
What would you consider a high res jpeg file to be, pixel wise..?

I read about 1024px longest side and as wondering what people use when selling there pictures as a high res jpeg file.

Thanks,

Tyler
 
Tyler138 said:
What would you consider a high res jpeg file to be, pixel wise..?

I read about 1024px longest side and as wondering what people use when selling there pictures as a high res jpeg file.

Thanks,

Tyler
Click to expand...

1024 x 681 is a popular size for a web gallery image, but certainly NOT "high res"!

It's only about 0.7 megapixels which is about the same as the very first most basic digicams had over a decade ago.
 
Surely it would be the same size as the RAW, just in JPG format.
 
I would consider a he-res jpeg to be full size from camera 3000x5000 or whatever, normally edited but saved at best (or near best) quality.
 
Resolution is not important unless you are goíng to print the image. There is no difference between a 300 dpi image that is 800x600 pixels and a 1 dpi image at 800x600 pixels as long as its shown on a computer screen.

The only thing important for files that are shown on a computer screen is the pixel dimension. Web browsers does not care about resolution at all. Only software I know that cares is Flash, when you import a bitmap, it has to be 72 dpi to be shown at its right size.
 
when I supply high res jpegs for repro they are 'camera size' so 4256 x 2832 at quality 12 (100%).
 
When we supply high res images they are generally somewhere around 3000 to 4000px longest side, which is native resolution for our oldest cameras, and stuff from higher res cameras get downsized a bit so it's all consistent. I certainly wouldn't consider 1024 to be high - our smallest digital image we deliver to a client is 900x600, and we sell that really as a facebook image.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top