Killer Web Site of the Day: Megapixel Calculator

Mon Oct 23, 2006 4:47AM EDT

See Comments (13)

You've got a 800 x 600 pixel image file. How big can you print it out at the highest quality? And how much space will it take up as a JPEG, a RAW file, or a GIF?

All these questions are answered immediately in the Megapixel Calculator, a must-bookmark resource for anyone who frequently works with digital images.

Just click over to the site, enter your image's width and height, and you'll immediately receive a number of pieces of information: The size of the file under a variety of formats, how many of those files you could fit on a variety of memory cards of standard sizes, how much each second of video at that resolution would consume, and—the best feature on the site, if you ask me—how large you can print out the image at screen, "normal," and high resolution. (In the case of my 0.5-megapixel example, that's a mere 2.7 inches by 2.0 inches at high res, which is what I'd recommend you look at if you're considering printing any photos.)

Killer stuff, and it can be a huge help in letting you decide how to set your digital camera based on what you ultimately want to with the images you shoot. (Want to print 8 x 10-inch photos? You'll need at least 7 megapixels or more for high-res printouts.) Nothing to install, and a brain-dead-simple interface. Click the "megapixel resolution chart" link as well for easy access to this information for many common resolutions.

UPDATE: To all who dispute that you need 7MP to produce an 8x10, this is a (painfully) simple math problem: A standard  7.1MP camera produces images that are 3072 pixels wide and 2304 pixels high. At a standard printing resolution of 300 dots per inch, that makes an image that is 10.2 inches wide and 7.7 inches tall at full resolution. If you try to create an image bigger, the printer will have to interpolate and print out at lower than 300dpi. That may indeed make for a passable print depending on the quality of the printer and the shot, but most viewers will notice the difference. That said, my intention with this post was not to dredge up the megapixel debate but to point users to a source where they can do these kinds of calculations easily. I am not affiliated with the linked website.

Comments on Killer Web Site of the Day: Megapixel Calculator

Post a Comment

Join in the discussion. Here you'll see the comments in the order they were posted.

  • 1 Posted by kristin_r_snyder on Thu Sep 3, 2009 4:53PM EDT Report Abuse

    "(Want to print 8 x 10-inch photos? You'll need at least 7 megapixels or more for high-res printouts.)" Unfortunately, most of the little digital compact cameras come with this resolution - and higher. But. At a cost that most consumers don't realize. That 10 megapixel point-and-shoot? Has the same size small sensor as it's 7, 5 megapixel predecessor. The cost to consumers? Sure, you can make an 8x10 print. But there is a lot more noticeable noise and grain since you're asking that many megapixels out of such a small sensor.

  • 2 Posted by smile.kyle on Thu Sep 3, 2009 9:28PM EDT Report Abuse

    5MP is all you need for a 8x10 full dpi print.

  • 3 Posted by tomdchi on Thu Sep 3, 2009 10:15PM EDT Report Abuse

    kyle, 300 dpi is NOT high res.

  • 4 Posted by joelmoore14 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 4:38PM EDT Report Abuse

    "Want to print 8 x 10-inch photos? You'll need at least 7 megapixels or more for high- res printouts." This is absolutely not true. I have a 6.1 megapixel digital SLR and I can easily print out a beautiful 20 x 30. The problem with the small camera craze is everyone is so concerned with resolution, it keeps going up while the lens quality stays the same. It does not matter if you have a 2 megapixel camera or a 10 megapixel camera, if your lens is crap all your left with is a bigger file of crap. Case in point. A couple of years ago, I finally got rid of my first digital camera. It was a 2 megapixel panasonic lumix. It had a Leica lens. That camera would shoot gorgeous pics but could really only blow them up to 5x7. The place where the amount of resolution really matters is in the photo editing world, but the article is not talking about that. I hate editing photos, so I utilize my camera so my pics come out looking good right off the camera. If they don't, then its my fault. I guess what I am trying to say is that if you want to shoot better pics you should look more at the quality and speed of the lens and not the resolution of the camera.

  • 5 Posted by kristin_r_snyder on Thu Sep 3, 2009 4:53PM EDT Report Abuse

    joelmoore14 - it's not so much the LENS that is the problem, but the resolution is being increased and they're keeping the SENSOR - which records the digital image - the same size. Asking more and more megapixels out of the same small sensor will degrade the image quality. This is in reference to the small compacts. For digital SLR, the lens does matter, but most lenses out there (Canon, Nikor, Sigma, Tamron, Tokina) produce pretty good lenses. If you're into DSLRs, www.fredmiranda.com is a great site for lens reviews.

More Posts: First Prev 1 2 Next Last

Post a Comment

Sign In to Post a Comment

My Tech

Please enable your browser's cookies to activate the My Tech column.

Also on Yahoo! Tech

Computers Home Office Wi-Fi & Networking Phones & PDAs Cameras & Camcorders TV & Home Theater Portable Audio
 

Site Map | Tour | Subscribe to Yahoo! Tech

Question and Answer content at Yahoo! Tech is written by Yahoo! users at Yahoo! Answers. Yahoo! does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any Yahoo! Answers content. For more information, read the Full Disclaimer.

Opinions expressed by the Advisors are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of Yahoo! Inc. Yahoo! receives no compensation from any manufacturer or distributor nor does it compensate any Advisor for the coverage of any product or service in any Advisor's content.