Ladies and Gentlemen,

I have been posting photos in 1280 pix format for sometime now, and have decided to try a higher resolution from now on.

The photos posted below are in 2400 pix, and I would appreciate t if you would tell me if they display well on your screens.

Many thanks.

They don't fit well onto my monitor, but I've only got a 17" screen. I have to slide the page over to see the full photo.

They load quick enough and are noticeably clearer, but I cannot see the entire photo unless I scroll over. Could just be me.

Greg

quote:

Originally posted by Greg Brownlee:
They don't fit well onto my monitor, but I've only got a 17" screen. I have to slide the page over to see the full photo.

They load quick enough and are noticeably clearer, but I cannot see the entire photo unless I scroll over. Could just be me.

Greg

+1

Gentlemen,

Can you tell me the resolution of your screen?

I have the same problem on my laptop, but it is self inflicted.

My screen is 3200x1600, which is greet for photos and videos.

But, To read the forums, I have to magnify it 200% in Internet Explorer.

I think most screens nowadays are 1920 pix.

I will wait and see what more answers I get, and I will post another set of photos at 1920 tomorrow.

I also have to move the screen on your photos to see them.

The resolution is incredible!
Very clear.

Saeed:

I can see the entire picture on my I pad. The pictures are extremely good. Very high resolution.

have to move screen: great photos

Saeed

They are clear, and easy to see on my 3 monitors.

For those having issues with picture to screen size do the following.

Press the 2 following keys at the same time.
Control & -

Have a 21 inch (diagonally measured) screen and find the pix crystal clear.

Suggest, Saeed, that you put them up in both dimensions one after the other in order to compare...

Regards, tim

They are great but I also have to slide the screen, and that gets old quickly!

quote:

Originally posted by Bwana338:
Saeed

They are clear, and easy to see on my 3 monitors.

For those having issues with picture to screen size do the following.

Press the 2 following keys at the same time.
Control & -

That doesn't seem to do anything on my monitor.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
Gentlemen,

Can you tell me the resolution of your screen?

I have the same problem on my laptop, but it is self inflicted.

My screen is 3200x1600, which is greet for photos and videos.

But, To read the forums, I have to magnify it 200% in Internet Explorer.

I think most screens nowadays are 1920 pix.

I will wait and see what more answers I get, and I will post another set of photos at 1920 tomorrow.

1280 x 1024 at work on old school junk. I'll check on my MacBook Pro at home later.

quote:

Originally posted by Frostbit:

quote:

Originally posted by Greg Brownlee:
They don't fit well onto my monitor, but I've only got a 17" screen. I have to slide the page over to see the full photo.

They load quick enough and are noticeably clearer, but I cannot see the entire photo unless I scroll over. Could just be me.

Greg

+1

+2...on my 17" laptop

But it shows great on my other LARGE SCREEN MONITOR

The pics are just a little too wide for me to view easily on my iMac. I'll bet 1800 wide would work though. This one is 1800 wide at a 2:1 ratio:



For viewing on my iMac the 1800x900 pixel ratio is my favorite, when the pictures lend themselves to be cropped that way. Picture taken on the Brittany pink granite coast in France.

This one is 1500 wide at the "normal" 3:2 ratio:

take up 2 screen widths on my Macbook Pro

quite nice

great pic s

It fits on my 27" Apple Thunderbolt display at 2560-by-1440 resolution.

It also shows nicely on iPad mini Retina.

Too wide for me. I need to press "CTR -" to get it to fit.

Very clear pictures though. Lumix FZ200 I suppose!

quote:

Originally posted by Bwana338:
Saeed

They are clear, and easy to see on my 3 monitors.

For those having issues with picture to screen size do the following.

Press the 2 following keys at the same time.
Control & -

Bwana338,
Thanks for that trick you just taught. Control & + works it the other way too.

Saeed,

Your test:

My laptop resolution is 1366 x 768 and shows only about half the picture without scrolling.

My desktop monitor resolution is 1920 x 1080 and shows about 3/4 of the test picture without scrolling.

Maybe your 1920-width test photos would be the perfect fit on my desktop, for viewing entire photo without scrolling side to side.

Great HD photos, thanks for sharing.

Some of us are not so greatly endowed with either great monitors or knowledge when it comes to PC,s. My PC is a laptop that is 15" on the diagonal. In point of fact my TV is only 25". Larger,of coarse, would be better . The guy told what keys to press to get the picture on the screen but since it greatly reduced the print size to unreadable he didn't tell how to restore it to normal. I was finally successful but only thru experimentation. Actually since I can't see the entire picture without scrolling several times I have no real idea whether they are better or not.On top of that I am the wrong person to make any appraisals on such items as I cannot see the difference between regular TV and HD on a good TV.I'm sure many people see more critically than I do. I'm consistently amazed at the photo forums I enjoy when a person posts an Image and then posts a second with changes and asks which is better it is rare that I can see a difference. I would say most other respondents either concur or disagree with the person who took it.

Pictures are too large for my Macbook Pro as well.

works great on my iMac 27 inch model- and fantastic pictures, BTW.

quote:

Originally posted by Nakihunter:
Too wide for me. I need to press "CTR -" to get it to fit.

Very clear pictures though. Lumix FZ200 I suppose!

These photos were taken with a Canon 7D and a Canon 70-200mm F2.8 and a Canon 2X converter.

The FZ200 is the very best bridge camera on the market right now. There is absolutely nothing out there that even comes close to it in quality and usability.

I have tried all the offerings from Canon, Nikon and Sony.

No competition at all.

Saw the pictures on my ipad, macbook and on my new samsung note pro 12.2.

Amazing on the samsung note pro - 2560x1600 4 mil. pixel display - perfect screen for these great pictures.

Mike

OK, I think my friend Wink has solved my problem.

I will stick to posting 1800 pix wide photos.

That gives us enough improvement in quality, without making life difficult for many of our members.

The last time I increased the size from 1024 to 1280 we had the same problem, as many members were still using screens with 1024.

I will post some 1800 pix photos later today and see.

Same here on width. No idea what this screen is.
High priced Dell from 5yrs ago. 19" cornerwise.
Can't beat the focus though, gosh, the hair is clear, so are the flys. Impressive with that.
George

I use a 19" screen and my resolution is 1920x1080. If I go to 75% I can almost see the complete picture without scrolling horizontally. The quality of the photos are very good.

The following photos are in 1800 pix, which I hope are going to help.

Definitely the right size for my monitors, both office desktop and home iMac.

I like the way the ivory tips show on the kudu horns.

The pictures load very quickly for me, and the resolution is great. Very sharp photos with pop. However, like the others, the images are too large for my screen. I'm on an old 15" laptop, about 4 years old, so perhaps that is part of the problem.

I'm going to also look on my new iPad and see if there is any difference. If so, I'll post again with the difference.

Great photos by the way. One hell of a nice kudu!

Saeed:

Is this the camera you were talking about, when you replied to Naki?
http://www.amazon.com/Panasoni...ords=lumix+dmc+fz200

I am looking to purchase an "general use" camera for our upcoming trip to RSA.

quote:

Originally posted by Jason P:
Saeed:

Is this the camera you were talking about, when you replied to Naki?
http://www.amazon.com/Panasoni...ords=lumix+dmc+fz200

I am looking to purchase an "general use" camera for our upcoming trip to RSA.

Jason,

Yes it is.

I can guarantee you will NOT be disappointed with it.

May I suggest you also get a spare battery, as if you are out, you will find that you taking lots and lots of photos.

Video is very good too.

My suggestion is set it for the highest resolution, both for stills and video.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by Jason P:
Saeed:

Is this the camera you were talking about, when you replied to Naki?
http://www.amazon.com/Panasoni...ords=lumix+dmc+fz200

I am looking to purchase an "general use" camera for our upcoming trip to RSA.

Jason,

Yes it is.

I can guarantee you will NOT be disappointed with it.

May I suggest you also get a spare battery, as if you are out, you will find that you taking lots and lots of photos.

Video is very good too.

My suggestion is set it for the highest resolution, both for stills and video.

Saeed:

Sorry to hijack your thread, but I do appreciate your response. I am going to buy this package and will surely get an extra battery. The reviews on Amazon were great in regards to this camera.

My wife has a Nikon DS. Maybe a 600?? However, I like the idea of your recommended camera as I am an amateur and will not have to be removing lenses!!

My goal is to take several thousand pic's!!

Thanks, Jason

quote:

Originally posted by Wink:
Definitely the right size for my monitors, both office desktop and home iMac.

I like the way the ivory tips show on the kudu horns.

Yep, the 1800 wide picture fits my 1920 resolution "wide screen" desktop monitor,
able to read entirety of post and see photo without scrolling side to side,
after initial centering of the post panel.
Best fit.
Excellent photos.
Stop action on the running wild dogs, mating lions, and incredible detail everywhere is dazzling.

This pretty much makes up my mind about something I have been considering for some time. To just not view pictures that won't fit on my small screen. It's just an inconvenience to do all the scrolling and you never get to appreciate the whole picture so I shall just forego them and read whatever is written. I hope this trend does not bleed over into pictures of firearms as that is one of my few pleasures left at least if you have to scroll viewing them you usually get a good idea of the details of the gun. It would be nice to not have to always bargain shop and the larger the investment the more careful one has to shop. You weigh what will work and what you can afford and make the best decision.A larger PC screen does not make an advertisement easier to see nor does it have an impact on an email and since most of the forums on the net are of the written word I can manage easily to get by with my small laptop. They seem to be some nice photos, though, their quality is obvious.

Saeed:

I took a ancient old laptop and the 1800 pix frames just fine and the resolution and photo quality was outstanding.

JDK

thanks for the Amazon link, Jason and thanks Saeed for the recommendation. i have toying with the idea of a bridge camera to replace my Sony 18MP point and shoot camera and took the plunge. considering that it comes with a 16gig card, 2 extra batteries and a travel charger, plus a few minor items, it seems like a no brainer. it arrives Monday. i don't make large prints, so i figure the megapixel difference won't matter. i especially like that the camera remains at f/2.8 throughout the entire zoom range.

The following photos were taken from the top of Burj Khalifa, the highest building in the world - at least for now.

Sadly, the weather wasnot perfect.