Regular pictures taken with phones range from about 10Kb to a couple hundred Mbs but today I see a post about a picture of brain tissue with a file size in petabytes. I also know that some NASA pictures are very large(dunno why) but even that makes more sense than a zoomed in pic of brain tissue. Obviously the instruments used are different but why such a large difference.
In: Technology
1. It depends on the image format–compression and the amount of “data” represented by each pixel matters a lot, and will be your base unit. If there is no compression, an RGB pixel without transparency, and 256 RBG values (each) requires at least 24 bits (3 bytes).
2. A 2d image scales up as a multiple of its increasing dimensions. 50×50 = 2,500 pixels. 100×100 = 10,000 pixels. 1920×780 = 1,497,600 pixels (>4 MB).
3. If the example is a 3d image, that means this increase in pixel density has *another* multiplier on it. 50x50x50 = 125,000 pixels. 100x100x100 = 1,000,000 pixels. 1920x780x780 = 1,168,128,000 pixels (>3 GB).
4. The above is an example of a more normal value of an image that isn’t even in the high end of what consumer-facing cameras are capable of (many can hit 3000+px in a dimension), and often for images of this level of detail, something like 1920px is *extremely* low. In order to get well resolved details of fine structures, you will want *multiples* higher, especially since they are looking at fine structures of cells across an area as comparatively massive as a millimeter (cells are at the micrometer scale). Once again, this is without compression and assuming 3-byte RGB (it’s possible they use other formats), but you get the idea of how this is scaling I’m sure.
Latest Answers