On Oct 18, 2004, at 12:05 PM, Mike Sheil wrote:
If he is using tape to record the images it suggests to me that the actual image size is not so critical as if one was loading from a catalogue but I would hate to be proved wrong.
It the images will appear as static shots then he needs only relatively low screen res shots... maybe 1024x768, but it he's going to add movement by panning across an image or zooming in, he'll need higher res files. How high depends on what they want to do. I just crossed this problem a few days ago. I shot stills for a political ad that would be used only for inclusion in a video production. I shot most of the images using a 2MP Kodak 720x so that I could work quickly using mostly available light. Time and budget wouldn't allow for extensive custom light setups for all of the myriad of shots that they needed. I shot a small number of the shots on my 14n where light and conditions allowed. I turned over RGB files at the respective camera's native resolution for each of the frames that they decided to use. I got a phone call a little later asking if I could make all these "lo-res" images look more like the ones shot with the 14n. They want to do slow deep zooms into the frame. I had to do a lot of creative upsizing! You need to find out a bit more about exactly how they want to use the images. Otherwise, give 'em something larger than they are likely to need and let them scale them down as needed.
Bob Smith
Accurate Image • Bob Smith Photographer • Waco Texas USA http://www.accurateimage.org
=============================================================== GO TO http://www.prodig.org for ~ GUIDELINES ~ un/SUBSCRIBING ~ ITEMS for SALE
