Enlargements

[sioleabha]

I am really confused about enlargements. It seems to me that in the past, when I had photos done at like Wal*Mart or Sears and got different sizes, the photos were all exactly the same -- some were just bigger than others. However, when I try to get an 8x10 of a photo that was originally 4x6, I end up having to cut bits of it off.

Then, Don said:

Originally Posted by bondarnes

As a comparison to film, a RAW digital file is like having a film negative and scanning it, where a JPEG digital file is like having a print to scan. If the print is really good you might get a decent scan, but if the print is bad then you may be out of luck. I always shoot in RAW + JPEG and burn those to a DVD. To me that is like having an original negative and a proof. If the proof is good then that is all I need, but if I am going to print enlargements then I am going to go back to my original negative/RAW image for that.

So, my question is this, if I take a photo that is zoomed in real close, if I take it in RAW, can I blow it up 8x10 without cutting anything out? Or is there something else I'm missing?

[kenw]

The prints you got before weren’t exactly alike, the “cut-off” (cropping) issue is still the same. The secret is to make sure the original photo is taken so that the various crops are allowed for later.

Taking them in RAW won’t have any real impact on this particular issue, it has to do with data compression, not htey physical size or aspect ratio of the image. But it is a good idea regardless.

[bpjones]

Originally Posted by sioleabha

However, when I try to get an 8x10 of a photo that was originally 4x6, I end up having to cut bits of it off.

Of course this would be the case. 8x10 and 4x6 are 2 different aspect ratios. If you doubled the size of a 4x6 it would be a 8x12.