Sister shop to Motorhome Facts
TomTom GO LIVE Camper & Caravan
The ultimate Sat Nav system for your motorhome, pre-programmed with 20,000+ POI's from the largest European Motorhoming Websites including the Motorhome Facts Campsite Database.
Welcome to Motorhomefacts, we are a thriving motorhome community (Largest in Europe). Why Not JOIN NOW and get instant access to more of the website. It costs nothing to join and only takes a few minutes. We have 200,000 different people visiting our site monthly and this amount of motorhomers in one place guarantees a fast response to any questions you may have. We also have unique facilities not found elsewhere such as our Online Logbook, stopover tracker, Motorhome directory with Ebay type feedback and the largest repository of motorhome campsites reviews found anywhere
I was recently given a Sony SLT A55V. Love the camera, but of course the mb per photo are around 4.12mb. If I reduce the size of mb, will I still get the best original quality? At 4.12 average per pic my hard drive will be full (I do use an external drive after sorting)
I was told by the shop that it depends on how you want to use the pictures.
If you want high quaility prints use best setting, but if you are only going to view them on the computor or the TV/picure frame viewer then use the lower settings as tthe screens cannot use the best settings to there full advantage.
So you are wasting storeage on something you will never use.
2MB is more than adequate for all domestic purposes.
The more MBs the higher the quality.
We always use the cameras highest settings but don't have storage problems on our PCs.
Just for interest.....take the same picture on the highest camera setting then on a setting much lower.......load on PC and have a look at the difference by enlarging it on the screen
______________________________________________________________ Ted.
I try and state simple facts in a nice way.
From a brief look at the Sony website, I think your camera can record images in raw file format. This will create the largest file size and give you the most flexibility in later use. If you do not need raw files, then switch to jpeg format. If you have already set it to jpeg, then reduce the image size to reduce the file size. For screen viewing, you do not need large files (as mentioned by others); if you want to print at A4 size (or larger), then you need to do some experiments with different file sizes (resolutions) to see how small you can go in terms of file size before the image becomes unacceptable.
Not being aware of your level of digital photo expertise, forgive me if I am telling you things you know, but if for example the term "Raw file" means little or nothing to you - you probably don't need it and a smaller file size will be adequate.
Thanks for all your imputs, I also have a Nikon E5600 compact and that has settings from 5mb down to pc size. So yes I know what you mean, all I wondered was if I use the best setting and then reduced to under 2mb would the picture quality be better than if I used a lower setting (It is set to M:8.4M) L is 16M and S is 4m.
I have a Tamron AF 70-300mm which I particularly want to photo wildlife, so perhaps its a case of L, M or S according to what Lens and subject I am doing. The picture quality aspect stated earlier - I would like opinions on.
Thank you
Wendy
I can only repeat....take a few images on different settings and have a look.
The quality of the images on virtually all cameras these days is far better than 95% of users need.
I used to use the images for A4 printing, Photoshop forum projects and the odd newspaper image but my camera only has an image size of around 2.4MB.
HTH
______________________________________________________________ Ted.
I try and state simple facts in a nice way.
I'd take the photos in the highest quality you can (if you don't know what raw is, you don't need to use it), and then reduce them on the PC if you need to.
Are you really that short of space on your hard disk? How old is your PC? A lot of PCs now are coming out with 500GB hard disks or more. I have over 10,000 photo files on my computer, and it takes up 33.8 GBytes. Each photo is between 3MB and 5MB in size.
The hard disk (laptop) is 320GB, and I have over half of it unused. Might it be worth upgrading your hard disk if you're short on space?
Hi there, Yes I have moved my photos to an external hard drive. I did have an Acer Aspire 5739 but it had a fault went back to the dealer and still waiting. Have been looking at alternatives. So will aquiring a 500gb or more soon. My HP pavilion Zv5484EA still is a lovely solid machine with harman/kardon speakers. don't make them like that anymore. Looked at ASUS lappy today, but expensive.
Thanks for your input, Wendy
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You cannot download files in this forum
UK
Waving in memory of Peter and Fiona
Fighting with Mavisīs MESO WARRIORS 
