How do you guys view your digital photos?

Discussion in 'Digital Cameras' started by King Sardon, Feb 6, 2007.

  1. King Sardon

    King Sardon Guest

    How do you guys view your digital photos?

    Computer monitor obviously, but I mean after that. Say you want to
    show a bunch of people a few dozen shots.

    o Digital projector?
    o HD TV?
    o Prints?

    Do digital projector and HD TV give enough resolution?

    KS
     
    King Sardon, Feb 6, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Computer monitor. Most often on other peoples' monitors when I'm
    visiting. I keep them on my web site.
    Yes. Well, a 1080p monitor gives more pixels than I normally put in my
    web versions of the photos. "Enough" is kind of a subjective concept.
     
    David Dyer-Bennet, Feb 7, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. King Sardon

    ray Guest

    Just got my wife a 'digital picture frame' for Christmas - that's fairly
    cool. I print a few now and again, and post some on my web site.
     
    ray, Feb 7, 2007
    #3
  4. King Sardon

    J. Clarke Guest

    A good projector or HDTV should be fine unless you're doing something
    specialized. You can get 1600x1200 projectors for 50 grand or so, or
    there's a 2048x1536 model availble for a quarter mil.
     
    J. Clarke, Feb 7, 2007
    #4
  5. King Sardon

    J. Clarke Guest

    Uh, HDTV isn't "TV". A good one will have higher resolution than most
    laptops.
     
    J. Clarke, Feb 7, 2007
    #5
  6. King Sardon

    Bob Williams Guest

    It is interesting to note how few people PRINT their images.
    If people are primarily going to view their work on a TV, HD TV,
    Laptops, Portable viewers, Desktop monitors or even 4x6 prints, why on
    earth do they buy 6-8+ MP cameras.
    The finest resolution HD TVs and Desktop Monitors top out at 2 MP.
    If camera manufacturers realize this, they should concentrate on making
    a killer 3-4 MP camera (to allow ample cropping) with great glass and a
    5 micron pixel pitch rather than accellerating this crazy MP race with
    1/2.7" sensors.

    For my top 10% of my keepers, I am primarily an 8x10 person. For my top
    1%, I go 11x14
    Bob Williams
     
    Bob Williams, Feb 7, 2007
    #6
  7. A modern LCD widescreen TV may be 1366 x 768 pixels, and provide quite a
    good viewing experience. Worth a try, and easier for group viewing than a
    laptop.

    We also use an Epson P-2000 for just one or two folk sitting together.

    http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/epsonp2000/

    Cheers,
    David
     
    David J Taylor, Feb 7, 2007
    #7
  8. My TV/DVD player has a facility for showing Jpegs on a Cd-Rom. I usually
    copy the files to a CD and use this facility. Not perfect, but more than
    adequate for showing friends and neighbours your stuff.

    Dennis.
     
    Dennis Pogson, Feb 7, 2007
    #8
  9. King Sardon

    J. Clarke Guest

    If the apparent image size is the same then it looks as good. He's
    talking about showing to a group, which isn't going to be two inches
    from the screen.
    Vertical res is still higher than a 1280x1024 monitor.
    And not using all the available pixels is a problem because?
    And where can one buy a "standard analog display TV" that is capable
    of 1080i? Not of accepting the signal and transcoding it to standard
    definition but one which can really display 1080?

    You've never actually seen an HDTV, have you?
     
    J. Clarke, Feb 7, 2007
    #9
  10. King Sardon

    J. Clarke Guest

    Friend of mine has a 37 inch that he uses for a computer monitor--his
    eyes are shot and he really needs the large size. The thing is as
    sharp as any I've seen. The only TV that he watches is the news.

    Personally I don't have a 1920x1080 display yet--my 1368x768 projector
    that I used to use in the classroom does a fine job though--one of the
    new 1080 projectors that costs the same should be really, really nice.
    The guy was asking about displaying to a group. I'm assuming that
    he's talking about in a conference room or auditorium, not in his
    living room. What would _you_ use?
    You've not seen HD then.
    Uh, nobody I know ever displayed their photos on a TV (well, not
    unless they put them in frames and stood them on top of it). For
    presentations to a group we used slide or overhead projectors. The
    projection monitor is the digital equivalent.
    All of this discussion of TV content is a bit afield--what was under
    discussion was a device for displaying photographs.
     
    J. Clarke, Feb 7, 2007
    #10
  11. King Sardon

    J. Clarke Guest

    One of the first major successes of the Chinese electronics industry
    was a family of inexpensive 1920x1080 LCD panels. They are used in
    monitors by Westinghouse, Benq, and Sceptre that I can think of off
    the top of my head that can be had for less than most other
    manufacturers' 1366x768 displays.
     
    J. Clarke, Feb 7, 2007
    #11
  12. King Sardon

    J. Clarke Guest

    Because (a) we don't always use the whole image and (b) it's always
    nice to have some headroom.
    Actually you can get both that go 3 MP. You'll pay but you can get
    them.
     
    J. Clarke, Feb 7, 2007
    #12
  13. King Sardon

    J. Clarke Guest

    Looking at the responses you've gotten I'm getting the impression that
    there is disagreement on what constitutes a "bunch" and I'm seeing
    many solutions proposed that are more appropriate to a family
    gathering than to, say, a classroom.

    So it would help if you could define the requirements a bit more
    clearly. Is your "bunch" a few people sitting on the sofa or 10-20
    people sitting around a conference table or is it 20-30 in a school
    classroom or is it a few hundred in an auditorium or what?

    When I think "bunch" I think of a college classroom myself.
     
    J. Clarke, Feb 7, 2007
    #13
  14. King Sardon

    Skip Guest

    I'd agree. I put up images on my new HD plasma a couple of days ago, and
    there was some distortion, and the resolution wasn't what it would be if it
    were printed to that size. OK for a party trick, but not for absolute image
    quality.
     
    Skip, Feb 7, 2007
    #14
  15. King Sardon

    Skip Guest

    Generally via print, if I really want to make the point of quality. The
    computer monitor is really only there for post production, although I will
    email images hither and yon. I put some of my images on a slide show on my
    42" plasma (new toy syndrome) and the images looked ok, but not stellar.
    Like I said in another post in this thread, nice party trick, but not the
    best for total image quality.
     
    Skip, Feb 7, 2007
    #15
  16. That's interesting, but 3.8 inch?! And the cost is very close to that of a
    low-end laptop.

    I find a laptop just fine for family get-togethers, now that LCD screens are
    so much better. Of course only a few people can view it at the same time,
    but that hasn't been a problem on such occasions.

    Neil
     
    Neil Harrington, Feb 7, 2007
    #16
  17. Exactly. My nephew's girlfriend got him a little shirt-pocket-sized Canon
    for Christmas . . . boasting 10.0 megapixels! I'm beginning to wonder if
    this mad race to cram more and more useless pixels into the same tiny sensor
    will ever stop.

    I don't even print that many large prints. For give-aways I generally use
    the Fuji machine at Wal-Mart for 4 x 6 prints.

    Neil
     
    Neil Harrington, Feb 7, 2007
    #17
  18. It's a specialised device, primarily for image storage. It takes both SD
    and CF cards and you can dump photos at the end of each day and re-use
    your cards if you wish. It's far smaller and much easier to use than a
    low-end laptop - virtually zero boot-up time, for example. If you were
    taking a laptop, perhaps you would not need an Epson P-2000, but with it
    there is no need for the laptop.

    Newer models in the range have increased the storage capacity and speed.

    Cheers,
    David
     
    David J Taylor, Feb 7, 2007
    #18
  19. King Sardon

    J. Clarke Guest

    I'm curious--is this a direct view plasma? If so, and if there was
    distortion, then something needs to be adjusted. A direct-view plasma
    display operating on a digital input should be pixel perfect.

    You're right that the res is not the same as a print the same size,
    but carrying around a bunch of 8 foot prints for a conference isn't
    very convenient.
     
    J. Clarke, Feb 7, 2007
    #19
  20. King Sardon

    HEMI-Powered Guest

    Today, King Sardon made these interesting comments ...
    I view mine almost exclusively at 1280 x 960 on a Samsung 21"
    flat panel display, a 213T. I have found it to be outstanding in
    everyway, especially in that I simply don't have the desk real
    estate for a CRT no matter how much better it is. I am angling
    around for a 24" Samsung so as to give my 21" to my wife.

    I also use a Canon Pixma 6600 photo printer for both car pictures
    and military pictures, my two main interests. It is a 6 cartridge
    inkjet with paper capability running the full gamut from plain
    paper to mat to semi-gloss to glossy and to "pro" which is super
    glossy. I am really high on this printer which I selected last
    spring after a year's research. I find results to be outstanding
    even at "normal" print quality.

    I occasional display pictures on a Sony 26" combined HDTV/PC
    monitor but results are not super as the max Windoze resolution
    is 1024 x 768. I have created DVDs to play on a rather old
    projection large screen TV in my family room. It is adequate for
    quicky presentations should somebody want to see my pics and
    there's too many to sit in my office

    As to your last question, in my view HDTV does not provide enough
    resolution but I have not fully explored that. The problem for
    me, with my only HDTV being the 26" Sony I talked about above, is
    finding a better way to get the JPGs onto the TV screen via a
    DVD. Attempts so far are OK but certainly not to HDTV standards.

    Somebody's gonna have to help me but I think that HDTV today is
    in the range of 1800 x 800 pixels, less than 2 MP, so there's a
    real limitation there.

    Back to printers for a moment. Canon and others now make 12
    cartidge photo printers! But, let me warn you, these things eat
    $15 ink cartridges like popcorn even when printing at normal for
    borderless 8.5 x 11. So, iffn ya wants ta get a really "good"
    printer, be prepared to pay not only for the printer but for lots
    of ink. So, the real answer to your question has to be qualified
    by "what is your quality expectation and what are your major
    subject(s)"? Answers will help you determine what to buy.
     
    HEMI-Powered, Feb 7, 2007
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.