Get more from your Mavic
The largest Mavic community in the world
Join Us Now

Mavic Air Photo Resolution

Curtismqt

Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2019
Messages
15
Reaction score
2
Age
34
I went out the other day and took some photos with my Mavic Air. I had it set to shoot 16:9 and in raw. When I got home I was suprised to see the file was at 18mb but the resolution was 960x544. Why is it that low of a resolution? When I shoot in 16:9 JPG mode I get a smaller file size ( around 3mb) but my resolution is 4056x2280. Can anyone explain this to me?

Thanks,
Curtis
 
  • Like
Reactions: RPBloor

Unknown Pilot

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2019
Messages
346
Reaction score
239
Location
Yes
I went out the other day and took some photos with my Mavic Air. I had it set to shoot 16:9 and in raw. When I got home I was suprised to see the file was at 18mb but the resolution was 960x544. Why is it that low of a resolution? When I shoot in 16:9 JPG mode I get a smaller file size ( around 3mb) but my resolution is 4056x2280. Can anyone explain this to me?

Thanks,
Curtis
Why would you shoot 16:9 photos? You're throwing away pixels.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mrmund

WithTheBirds

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2018
Messages
2,349
Reaction score
1,417
Why would you shoot 16:9 photos? You're throwing away pixels.
That’s a good point but probably not relevant when shooting DNG. Is it simply a case of the image being masked for preview or is part of the sensor discarded? It might be the case that the full image is recoverable in post processing.
 

Unknown Pilot

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2019
Messages
346
Reaction score
239
Location
Yes
That’s a good point but probably not relevant when shooting DNG. Is it simply a case of the image being masked for preview or is part of the sensor discarded? It might be the case that the full image is recoverable in post processing.
Probably not. I don't think I've ever shot a camera at less than its native resolution. Maybe I'll give it a shot in the morning.
 

WithTheBirds

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2018
Messages
2,349
Reaction score
1,417
Probably not. I don't think I've ever shot a camera at less than its native resolution. Maybe I'll give it a shot in the morning.
You are probably wrong.

When I have tried it the observation was the full sensor area was available for processing in RAW conversion, the suggested crop was that selected in the camera for image area.

If you have a particular final aspect presentation in mind it can be handy to set it in the camera, often assists greatly with composition.

Let us know how you go with your experiment.
 

Unknown Pilot

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2019
Messages
346
Reaction score
239
Location
Yes
You are probably wrong.
I was agreeing with you. ;)

EDIT: It turns out we were both wrong. Shooting in 16:9 gives you a raw file in 16:9 and not a masked native resolution file. I took the same photo in both formats as JPG+raw and the 16:9 yielded a file that was significantly smaller.

Screen Shot 2020-03-22 at 07.31.31.png
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member 94047

Guest
That 960x544 resolution isn't making any sense to me. The MA's still images have resolutions of 4056×3040 in 4:3 and 4056×2280 in 16:9.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Curtismqt

G Randy Brown

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2020
Messages
134
Reaction score
78
Age
67
Location
New Mexico USA
Why would you shoot 16:9 photos? You're throwing away pixels.
If you were going to put them into a video (with video footage) I would think you would always choose 16:9, no?
 

G Randy Brown

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2020
Messages
134
Reaction score
78
Age
67
Location
New Mexico USA
Yeah, but you can always crop a 4:3 to 16:9 and you get to choose what part of the frame you want.
I'll take your word for it ...since I'm a video guy that was tickled to move from 4:3 to 16:9 I just assumed when shooting stills for video one would not to have black stripes on the side but if the resolution is higher I guess it would make since to crop in post...thanks!
 

Done

Well-Known Member
Premium Pilot
Joined
Jan 4, 2020
Messages
668
Reaction score
354
Age
40
Location
Port Saint Lucie, FL
I'll take your word for it ...since I'm a video guy that was tickled to move from 4:3 to 16:9 I just assumed when shooting stills for video one would not to have black stripes on the side but if the resolution is higher I guess it would make since to crop in post...thanks!
The resolution is the same it’s not higher. The pixels on the sensor are the same density i.e. resolution regardless of the cropping you set.

There’s a darn good reason to shoot 16:9 if that’s what you need do you wanna have to go through and crop every single one of them?
There’s no difference between letting the camera do the cropping or you do the cropping.
Also you’ll get a better feel for the composition looking at it at the crop you need
 

G Randy Brown

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2020
Messages
134
Reaction score
78
Age
67
Location
New Mexico USA
The resolution is the same it’s not higher. The pixels on the sensor are the same density i.e. resolution regardless of the cropping you set.

There’s a darn good reason to shoot 16:9 if that’s what you need do you wanna have to go through and crop every single one of them?
No I don't want to crop them especially if it's the same resolution with just a different aspect...that said, if it is the same resolution and I cropped it to fill a 16:9 screen I would actually lose resolution because it would have to be zoomed (I wouldn't want black bars on top and bottom).
Thank you for your response Done!
 

Done

Well-Known Member
Premium Pilot
Joined
Jan 4, 2020
Messages
668
Reaction score
354
Age
40
Location
Port Saint Lucie, FL
No I don't want to crop them especially if it's the same resolution with just a different aspect...that said, if it is the same resolution and I cropped it to fill a 16:9 screen I would actually lose resolution because it would have to be zoomed (I wouldn't want black bars on top and bottom).
Thank you for your response Done!
I thought you said you wanted 16:9 To go with your video.
 

Unknown Pilot

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2019
Messages
346
Reaction score
239
Location
Yes
There’s no difference between letting the camera do the cropping or you do the cropping.
There is absolutely a difference. What happens if you decide that the sweet spot of the image you wanted was not in the camera cropped image?

imagea.jpg

What if you decide, for whatever reason, that you want a little less sky and a little more land?

imageb.jpg

The more pixels you have at your disposal the better. Especially when batch changing images to whatever aspect ratio you want, and keep in mind you may wish to use that image in a completely different context at a later stage, is trivial.
 

Done

Well-Known Member
Premium Pilot
Joined
Jan 4, 2020
Messages
668
Reaction score
354
Age
40
Location
Port Saint Lucie, FL
There is absolutely a difference. What happens if you decide that the sweet spot of the image you wanted was not in the camera cropped image?

View attachment 97090

What if you decide, for whatever reason, that you want a little less sky and a little more land?

View attachment 97091

The more pixels you have at your disposal the better. Especially when batch changing images to whatever aspect ratio you want, and keep in mind you may wish to use that image in a completely different context at a later stage, is trivial.
I maintain that seeing the crop you will get on Screen gives you a better idea of how to frame the shot.
Still it’ll be the same amount of pixels at the same resolution Just as I said.
It’s not about pixels it’s seeing the shot
 
Last edited: