Five Ways to Shoot Ultra-High Resolution Photos Without Upgrading Your Camera

Shooting at super-high resolutions can be a great way create massive prints or simply to make some really impressive images. This helpful video will show you five ways to shoot at higher resolutions with the camera you already have. 

Coming to you from Joel Grimes, this great video talks about five techniques for shooting at high resolutions using the camera you already have. Even if you don't have any plans to make large prints, I really recommend trying it at least once for yourself. Not only is it a good technique to practice and keep in your bag of tricks, I personally find it immensely satisfying to load a giant file on my screen and zoom into all the little details. It really reinvigorates my love of photography. A small tip if you're attempting any of these methods is to use extra care to really ensure your tripod is level, as you'll lose a fair bit of resolution and possibly run into issues in post if it's off. If your tripod doesn't have a bubble level, most cameras have an electronic level that can be turned on with live view, so take the extra minute to double-check that. 

Log in or register to post comments

14 Comments

user-204784's picture

Just my 2 cents: I like it when you summarize the video. A video is a commitment. I often pass on it. Maybe enough don't though, but I click away when there's no summation.

Dan Lubbers's picture

I'm a skimmer myself, I like to get the general analysis of most content and videos involve time I don't have to spend. I would much rather see more content in written form.

Carl Crumley's picture

Me too. Give me a written summary and I can decide if I want to take time to watch a video.

I can't even watch videos at my office, so if it's worth while I may save for later, but without decent description I don't tend to bother... And even when I do, it's usually a skip to the point viewing. Seriously people, you're not creating a feature film, you're mostly just wasting my time will filler between points that could be made and read in under 30 seconds.

I’m in this camp too. It uses up huge amount of data and it had better be worth it if I click it. If you don’t describe what’s in it I’ll pass. Personally I prefer reading to watching. Less annoying usually. I know it’s about advertising revenue but it puts me off.

Yep yep yep. No need for video material on that topic, just write text and show the pics, and that's it.

An HD video is worth 1MB of data per second. This video of a guy talking is almost 800 MB, more than regular audio CDs for those who knew these things. It could have been covered in a blog post for like 4 MB.

Save the planet, save the data, make responsible use of YouTube. It's not because it's free that it is costless.

William Howell's picture

Excellent post Alex, I’m planning a family portrait using this method, with a 70-200.

Giovanni Aprea's picture

A portrait with a TS lens??? 🤔 Nice idea but how do you keep your model steady whilst you shift the lens?

romain VERNEDE's picture

It as been done since photography exists, think large format camera which are by construction all TS lens equiped :)

Yes, but large format cameras don't stitch several takes.

romain VERNEDE's picture

you're right but have faith in you favourite stitching program, wether it's photoshop or photo stitch or...just ask the sitter not to move for a few seconds, and as you increase your skill, it's only a matter or 2s

What's the point of ultra-high resolution, again ? To print at 200 DPI in letter format ?

Also, what he does is called the Brenizer effect. It has been known for quite a while.

romain VERNEDE's picture

It's not really brenizer here, as the goal is to catch more details or bigger image as opposed to shallow the DOF.