Image size is 2272X1704 and the quality is set at Fine. On a 256MB card this gives me 243 images as opposed to 999+ with 1600×1200 image size and standard quality.

2272×1704 in comparison to 1600×1200 results in roughly a doubling of filesize. The remaining difference that lets you get 4x as many pics on a card is the greater compression the camera applies to “standard” quality images versus “fine” quality images. More compression (i.e. the more data that’s taken out of an image) means lower quality, and some of the compressed data can never be recovered no matter if you save the file as tiff in PS. Its hard to put a rule on it, but a standard image will almost certainly be fine if your final intent is to put images on the web, and probably OK for images at 7×5 and maybe even at A4. However, once you go above that size you’re likely to get pixelation and qualuty loss in printed images.

Absolutely nothing wrong with shooting jpegs, nor anything wrong with shooting “standard” rather than “fine” – they will satisfy 99% of users. The only problem comes if you put your pics on airliners.net or a commercial aviation photo site, and then a potential paying client says that they want to buy the image for a full-page magazine spread or larger format commercial printing.

Andy

The decision RAW versus JPG is an interesting one, but a couple of key issues worth considering are as follows:

1. As has already been said, jpeg is a lossy format. That means that each time the file is saved, some data is lost – not much, but some (the compression routines are not perfect). Sure, you can make some changes to an image, change your mind, and then instead of applying changes on top of changes you can start again, but even the original jpeg out of the camera has a minor quality loss compared to the “raw” data because it is in itself compressed. Think of it like duplicating a slide – every time you duplicate and then duplicate the duplicate, the quality goes down slightly. Likewise, every time you save a jpeg, the quality goes down slightly. I have also heard it said that a jpeg has less lattitude / colour depth that a raw image, meaning that if you blow highlights (due over-exposure) or under-expose, you’re more likely to be able to pull the detail back from a raw file than from a jpeg.

2. Certainly for Canon (and presumably for Nikon to) any settings you make in camera (e.g. in-camera sharpening, colour balance, compression, image size, etc) are applied by the camera as it creates a jpeg from the “raw” sensor data. Some settings, such as in-camera applied sharpening, are impossible to reverse in post processing. So if you over-sharpen a picture in-camera and you use jpeg, you’re stuffed – it is just not possible to “soften” the image again without losing quality. Likewise, if you compress a jpeg picture in-camera, you can’t recover all of that compressed out data. And if you set the wrong white balance and use jpeg, you’re effectively trying to reconstruct something that’s already been slightly damaged – most times it’ll be fine, but not perfect. With raw files on the other hand, camera setting such as sharpening, white balance and compression are merely parameters recorded in the raw file the camera creates – the camera does not actually alter the base image. These parameters in the raw file are read by the conversion program on the PC (Rawshooter or whatever) and applied by the program to create the output image. However, critical is the fact that you can over-ride the in-camera settings on the PC program at conversion time, without affecting the original image, and of course if you do this on a PC you have the benefit of seeing the effect up-close on a much larger screen.

Now, with most DSLRs being in the 6mp plus range now, non of the above will be noticable on jpegs that are to be used on the web, or printed up to A4 and maybe up to A3. The downside of raw is its more work. Advantages of jpeg are of course, as has again been stated, smaller file sizes and thus faster write times, easier processing (including abaility to see the images in windows exporer, etc), etc. However, if your target is the commercial market, particularly if you are likely to have images reproduced very large and upwards interpolation of the image size might be needed, then starting out with a raw file gives you the very best platform on which to start work.

So, over to you…

Andy

18-hour TAF for EGNX shows it may be above x-wind limits. If not, may try to make the huge trip down!

Andy

DHC-6 Twin Otter series 300
Manufacturers serial number 715
First flight 16/09/1980

N8489H Air Group International, delivered 19/11/1980
HK-2534 Tavina Colombia, leased 19/11/1980
N8489H Air Group International, returned 10/1985
N8489H Elk Creek Holdings, bought 03/1986
N8489H First Texas Turbine Aircraft Company, bought 06/1987
5Y-SKL Skytrails (Kenya) Ltd, bought 01/1988, still current

Data courtesy “Turboprop Airliner Production List” published by The Aviation Hobby Shop

Andy

Nice pics…

I know where A6-EBG went after it got to Dubai from Glasgow – EK418 Dubai-Bangkok-Sydney-Auckland (I was on it DXB-BKK! 🙂 )!

Andy

Taking into account the prediction and the measurement accuracy, including in the test set up, the satisfactory results achieved so far as well as the proven good prediction capabilities should enable Airbus to fully demonstrate compliance with the certification requirements, with some optimisations if needed, in time for type certification later this year.

I think that’s techno-speak for “well we didn’t quite make the target, but it was roughly in line with expectation, and we can fix it”

From what I understand, the predictions were sufficiently accurate to and the margin sufficiently small to allow a revised structure (if it hasn’t been revised already) to be demonstrated to meet certification requirements through interpolation of existing results (rather than breaking another wing)???

Andy

And what makes you think its a “fluffed” touchdown? Windsock indicates a crosswind and a lowered into-wind wing is not a particularly unusual occurrance in such circumstances as it helps counteract the drift caused by the wind.

A