Kodak DX6340 jpg size very small at max res.

Discussion in 'Kodak' started by aussieworker, Dec 29, 2004.

  1. aussieworker

    aussieworker Guest

    Just a query for anyone with one of these 4MP cameras.
    The image size at max resolution is below 1MB. This has me a little puzzled
    as my 5MP Canon produces files typically over 2MB.

    I am wondering if Kodak's jpg image compression is more severe than most.
    Leading me into the question of to what detriment to picture quality.

    Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.

    Regards,
    Tony
     
    aussieworker, Dec 29, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. aussieworker

    Ben Thomas Guest

    I have the 4MP DX6490. Kodak uses "very clever" jpeg compression algorithm which
    usually results in 500k file sizes. Occasionally I get 1.5MB files when there
    isn't much sky or grass.

    IMHO they overcompress sky, grass, and even skin tones if you're doing a
    close-up portrait.

    If you take a landscape with a lot of detail the compression is much less.

    --
    --
    Ben Thomas - Software Engineer - Melbourne, Australia

    My Digital World:
    Kodak DX6490, Canon i9950, Pioneer A05;
    Hitachi 37" HD plasma display, DGTEC 2000A,
    Denon 2800, H/K AVR4500, Whatmough Encore;
    Sony Ericsson K700i, Palm Tungsten T.

    Disclaimer:
    Opinions, conclusions, and other information in this message that do not
    relate to the official business of my employer shall be understood as neither
    given nor endorsed by it.
     
    Ben Thomas, Dec 29, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. aussieworker

    Ron Hunter Guest

    Kodak has a rather aggressive cimpression. It is not usually a problem,
    but I wish yhey had an option for less compression.
     
    Ron Hunter, Dec 30, 2004
    #3
  4. aussieworker

    Ron Baird Guest

    Greetings Tony,

    Actually, the compression used in Kodak cameras is quite sophisticated and
    designed to work extremely well in the EasyShare cameras. You will be
    pleased with your results. Also, the file size is related to the content of
    the image and the resolution at which you are viewing it. For instance, If
    you were to go into a novelty shop that had many displays and such along
    with multicolored quilts etc. you would find the file size is larger. On
    the other hand, if you were to take a picture of a field and sky, the image
    file would be smaller. The content and how the image is processed makes the
    difference.

    I have purchased your model for friends who love the images and believe them
    to be extremely good. Also, if you are opening the images in EasyShare
    software you can see the resolution setting and such when you change it you
    will see the file shift up and down based on the chosen resolution or print
    size.

    Try going to the Ofoto site and having a print made. If you have not yet
    visited them you can get some free prints by which you can judge quality.

    Talk to you soon, Tony,

    Ron Baird
    Eastman Kodak Company
     
    Ron Baird, Jan 3, 2005
    #4
  5. aussieworker

    Jürgen Eidt Guest

    ;)
    Since its difficult to get to this data, are you using a different quality
    level for the Y and C channels?
    Most cameras apply the same scaling for all channels but having a higher
    quality for luminance channel than for the chrominance channel is quite
    efficient.
    I'm using this for web pictures using the new JPEG features and if you don't
    print them it looks really good.
     
    Jürgen Eidt, Jan 3, 2005
    #5
    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.