How do I get the highest resolution my camera can take a photo at? I want to be able to have a picture as Photoshop-ready as I possibly can.

For example, if I need to upload high resolution art at 300 dpi for screen printing. I am using a picture, that when imported into my computer, its resolutionis 1378px x 775px horizontal & vertical resolution at 96 dpi with a bit depth of 24. When I place it on a Photoshop canvas that has the bigger dimensions both horizontally and vertically and has the DPI set at 300, when I zoom in 100% my picture is blurry around the edges of objects.

So my question is how do I set up my camera so that I don't get a blotchy picture when I place it in Photoshop. From one of the answers I take it that DPI is not associated with a camera setting PPI would be.

  • Okay, the question is now no longer unclear, but it is still a little confused. I suggest first reading Does the dpi number reported by camera in JPG have any meaning? — and note that this applies to "PPI" as well — and then refocusing on the actual question of "my question is how do i set up my camera so that i dont get a blotchy picture when i place it in photoshop."
    – mattdm
    Sep 11 '15 at 12:55
  • 1
    But there's still a puzzle — you say you have a 1378px × 775px picture. That's not very many pixels — in fact, just about one megapixel. Is that coming from your camera, or somewhere else?
    – mattdm
    Sep 11 '15 at 12:57
  • @mattdm, you pointed the obvious problem, which is why is the OP getting such a ridiculous amount of pixels in the first place. Next step is camera manual or extra/interpolation...
    – Olivier
    Sep 11 '15 at 16:49

Edited to fit the new question:

You can not change the ppi (or dpi) settings on your camera. Normally they declare 72 dpi, 96 or some do not declare it at all.

The thing you can do is declare the resolution on your canvas on Photoshop to fit your the one your camera is declaring, before loading a photo.

The previows answer

You are really confusing diferent things here.

1) PPI

DPI is in reality a unit used in printers to define how small the dots are (and how much dots can be in an inch)

In photography, the unit is not dot (per inch), but pixel (per inch). The number you are refering, 300, is this unit: ppi, and it is a relationship between the actual pixels of an image and the phisical print size.

Here are 2 photos:

One is about 700 ppi and the other is 10 ppi.

PPI is just a number inside the photo and its only used on print. It has no meaning in the photo itself.

2) Photo resolution.

Some High end cameras (more than $40,000 usd.) like this https://www.phaseone.com/, can go for 80 Megapixels.

Very big files.

3) Composite images.

If you merge several pictures, you can make very, very, very big files: http://www.collective-evolution.com/2015/01/20/nasa-has-released-the-largest-picture-ever-taken-it-will-rock-your-universe/ 1.5 billion pixels, or arround 1,000 Megapixels.

or this ones: http://360gigapixels.com/london-320-gigapixel-panorama/ 320 gigapixels.

  • 3
    I don't think this terminology is correct at all. Exif metadata, for example, very clearly uses dpi — even though that also makes no sense. Further, the images you have posted have been stripped of all metadata anyway. These images are displayed at whatever PPI and/or DPI they happen to be displayed at on various users' systems.
    – mattdm
    Sep 7 '15 at 23:48
  • 1) The use of dpi is basicly wrong. 2) Yes the photos are the same, I can modify that little number inside (ppi) and the photo is the same, that is the point. 3) The images are displayed at whatever... yes. But the photo resolution its the same. Yes. This terminology is correct.
    – Rafael
    Sep 7 '15 at 23:52
  • I don't disagree with your basic point, but I also don't want things confused further by introducing PPI into the mix and then representing that in a confusing way.
    – mattdm
    Sep 7 '15 at 23:59
  • 2
    From an update to the question: "From one of the answers i take it that DPI is not associated with a camera setting PPI would be." — exactly why I felt this answer wasn't helpful.
    – mattdm
    Sep 11 '15 at 6:53
  • 1
    It was obvious to me from the original question that throwing in an argument of PPI vs. DPI was just going to add confusion. And then it exactly did. You can have your two points back when you make that part of your answer less confusing. And your new answer still doesn't actually make the important part clear.
    – mattdm
    Sep 11 '15 at 12:53

There is no highest resolution as DPI is a meaningless without knowing the print size.

With a given camera, the smaller you print, the higher the DPI. If you need a certain DPI for some given print size than you can determine the resolution needed.

As a simple example, to print a 6" x 4" print at 300 DPI, you need 6 x 300 = 1800 pixels wide and 4 x 300 = 1200 pixels tall. This is required 1800 x 1200 = 2160000 pixels which is 2 megapixels or so.

There are several cameras that capture 50+ MP. For example, a Pentax 645Z can produce a 27" x 20" at 300 DPI or you can decide to make a 13" x 10" at 600 DPI instead. Print smaller and you can get even higher resolution, up to the maximum which your printer can handle.

  • But don't most printers require at least 3 dots to reproduce one pixel? And some may require as many as 6 or 8, depending upon the number of ink colors the printer uses?
    – Michael C
    Apr 24 '16 at 2:46
  • @MichaelClark - Its much more than that, usually 36 or 49, at least. That's because dots are only only tone of one color, so you need a whole pattern to print any color among the printer's gamut.
    – Itai
    Apr 24 '16 at 3:15
  • So then don't you really mean 300 PPI or 600 PPI, not 300 or 600 DPI?
    – Michael C
    Apr 24 '16 at 9:05

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.