Image Matters Logo
The Essence of
IMAGE MATTERS

More, size vs resolution
   

 


If java disabled or no main menu showing above - use links below.
Image Introduction
Image Basics
JPG ''Lossiness''
Picture ''Anatomy"
Color Models
Colors - More Facts
Image Tools
Image "Tweaks"
Animated Images
Graphics
Resolution and DPI
Scanning
Printing after
Scanning
Digital Cameras
Binary and Hexadecimal
with Color
Picture Taking
Considerations
Image ''Burden''
Pre-Posting,
Image edits
Posting Pictures
Introduction
Posting Attachments
Posting with
"Hot Links"
Photo Facts
Photo Facts - Diagrams



Maybe this is just an excuse to post my own favorite pic' .... the muzzle flash from my Raging Bull .454 Casull !

I am using it though to further illustrate sizing, relative dimensions on the screen and actual file size. The original was taken on a 3.1 MPix camera ... my Kodak DX6340, with a shutter open time of 1 second (helped by my son) ... by some miracle (considering how the beast jumps!) the gun is all but frozen. My working original pic is 1494 x 1059 - only actually 1.6 MPix, but it had to be cropped from full size to get rid of unwanted and unnecessary peripheral matter.

This is compressed to yield a file of around 330k at approx 10:1 compression. In both file size and dimensions it is way too large to post ''as is''. Anyone wanting it BTW as a desktop image you can download it.

From choice my first reduction would be to 600 pixels but to fit this page layout we have first a 550 x 390. It is 230 DPI, and represents 37% of the large original ...... file size being 43k at 14:1 compression. I think personally, it is large enough to ''do the job'' in a post.

.454 muzzle flash - 550 x 390, 42k file size


Just for interest' sake ...... rather like I did with the 1911 ..... here I have shown an example of a 500 x 390 section of the original. As much as anything for comparison purposes. This too is compressed 14:1 and a file size of 42k .... so very much on a par with the reduced version. This is nominally a 37% portion.

Bearing in mind the ''square law'' aspects with image sizes .... it might be useful to realize that if we expanded this to match the original image size of 1494 x 1059 ... we would multiply by 2.7 (the 37 percentage, inverse) and if we then square that (image has 2 sides!!) we arrive at a factor of 7.3. Multiply this file size of 42k by that and we get ...... 310k ... an approximation to the original file size! It all holds good!

A 550 x 390 'slice' taken from the original.  42k file size



Again working from the large original - this version is sized down to 400 x 284, which is now 27% of original. Compression is 13:1 giving a file size of a mere 25k.

.454 muzzle flash - 400 x 284, 25k file size


Once more sizing down from original - two more even smaller versions. The first is 200 x 142, 13% of original .... and compressed now 9:1 for a file size of 8k.

The last and smallest ..... barely a ''thumbnail'' .... is 100 x 71, 7% of the original, compressed 6:1 and a file of 3k.

Note with these two, compression has been ''backed off'' ...... because once things get this small they are even more sensitive to over-compression distortions.

.454 muzzle flash - 200 x 142, 8k file size
.454 muzzle flash - 100 x 71, 3k file size


Of course, the last two are obviously well on the small side! It is interesting to note though that even the smallest almost conveys the meaning of the image (just!). The 200 x 142 certainly does manage reasonably (well, for other shooters!).

The point is ... although resolution and definition do inevitably drop off badly, the scale of the image when smaller allows us to still ''see'' almost more than is really there - a bit like ''filling in the gaps'' with incomplete text.

I would reiterate that for most purposes, and speed of download - the first reduction to 500 x 390 is a very adequate representation. (JMHO!).


Back to Top
 

©AlumBankWeb 2004 - 2012