Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

RE: Embedding pictures into Reports

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Mr. Crocker,

You've hit on a hidden truth.

It is always better to have more capacity and scale back than to never have
enough.

There are actually two problems here and you need to think about what you
intended application is.

If your embedding these in a report, a typical resolution of 650x480 and
less than 200 dpi will almost always provide you with a reasonable print
out.

If you printing to a PDF for electronic distribution via internet, and don't
need to have the zoom capability. Then you need only 100 dpi resolution at
between 650x480 to 1240x768.  That make the images around 100kb or so, vs.
2MB

In my office I do the following:

The pictures are downloaded from the camera at least 2048x1356 or higher
resolution.  These are my HiRes Images and then read protected.  These are
then loaded in and editor (I use Corel Photo Paint 9 but whatever flavor you
want) and resample at 33% to 648x480 and saved as 50% compression JPG with
10% smoothing in the LoRes folder.  Almost any computer can quickly
manipulate the LoRes folder images and embed, e-mail, or place in PDF with
out a huge space.

If you do this as a matter of routing you can write a Macro handle this as a
batch.  Really quick that way.

At the completion of the project I then burn a CD with all of the digital
files, including scans of field notes that need to be saved and forward to
the project people.  It's amazing how little this costs and how much
information you have sent your client at a total cost of less than 10$ per
CD.  And they get the HiRes images to look at and zoom or whatever.

Now if I was just that diligent about getting my website caught up.

Arvel

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Crocker [mailto:pcrocker(--nospam--at)reidmidd.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 3:01 PM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
Subject: RE: Embedding pictures into Reports


There are a few advantages to high pixel counts, even if they aren't needed.
First, most reviewers suggest 4 MP for 8x10 pictures, which is a reasonable
size that many printers can handle, and in terms of price a 3 - 4 MP camera
is pretty reasonable these days.  Second, having a higher than required
resolution allows you to crop pictures after the fact while still retaining
an acceptable resolution for printing.  This may let you print out only the
portion of the picture that addresses your point and cut out a lot of
extraneous background if you choose.  Third and most importantly for me,
having a greater MP image gives you more detail if you want to zoom in and
look for details later.  On one project, I was given some routine job site
pictures of some concrete reinforcement before the concrete was poured, and
later found out that there might have been a problem with the reinforcement
in one spot.  Since no one had anticipated the problem, they hadn't zoomed
in on the problem area, and the resolution wasn't good enough to zoom in it
later.  It was frustrating for everyone that documentation existed, but
simply wasn't sufficient.

I currently use a 6 MP camera with a 512 MB memory card and spare batteries.
I will readily admit that this set up is overkill for nearly any conceivable
use I have for it.  Still, I observed early in my career that I have never
come away from a job site visit wishing I had fewer pictures or less
information.  If the extra storage or extra resolution ever makes the
difference between having what I need and making an extra site visit, or
perhaps just not getting what I need at all, the extra $70 I paid for it
over a more reasonable set up will be covered many times over.

Paul Crocker, PE, SE

>>> "Gautam MANANDHAR" <GMANANDH(--nospam--at)ci.alameda.ca.us> 03/01/05 11:46AM >>>
A 2 megapixel resolution is good for 8x10 size print without loss in
image quality.  Most of the prints I make or put in reports are max 4x6.
 FWIW, I think unless you plan to make very large prints, buying a
camera with more than 3 megapixel is money down the drain.  What is
important in a digital camera, for me anyway, is the optical zoom and
focal length of the lens - a wide angle comes handy at building sites;
however, not too many digital cameras come with wide angle lens.

Gautam



******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
*
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
*   site at: http://www.seaint.org
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********



******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
* 
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you 
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted 
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web 
*   site at: http://www.seaint.org 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********