Author Topic: Upsizing for Large Prints (Read 5852 times)

ComfortEagle2095 · « **on:** February 25, 2012, 11:40 »

I want to make some very large prints (>40 inches/side) from ~20mp files (from my 5DII).

I know I'll lose a lot in upsizing but I'll live with it. I want to know what is the best way to do this for the best possible quality?

I use CS4. I shoot RAW which I've processed/edited and saved as .psd's. I'll order the prints from a local print lab that I've worked with a lot.

Any experiences to relate?

Cheers

click_click · « **Reply #1 on:** February 25, 2012, 11:50 »

It depends on the printer.

What does >40in. mean? 80in.? 200in.? 500in.?

I've printed 6MP photos from Zazzle on 24x16 on photo paper which was pretty good. I'm not looking at the print from 1 foot away anyway.

I figure a 20MP original should work fin for 40in. on photo paper unless you print at 300dpi, then you would need 12.000 pixels on the long side...

Find out what dpi your printer is running. That will tell you what pixel resolution you need.

jm · « **Reply #2 on:** February 25, 2012, 11:54 »

Yesterday I downloaded trial of Perfect Resize Sofware 7. I'm not decided if it worth hundred dollars yet, but you can try it.

http://www.ononesoftware.com/products/suite/perfect-resize/?ind

etienjones · « **Reply #3 on:** February 25, 2012, 13:13 »

Genuine Fractals is great for image resizing,

have a look here:

http://www.ononesoftware.com/products/suite/perfect-resize/?ind

Just don't take this claim seriously . . . "Enlarge images up to 1000% without sacrificing quality"

Sorry, this link was already given.

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #4 on:** February 25, 2012, 13:25 »

Quote from: etienjones on February 25, 2012, 13:13

Genuine Fractals is great for image resizing,

have a look here:

http://www.ononesoftware.com/products/suite/perfect-resize/?ind

Just don't take this claim seriously . . . "Enlarge images up to 1000% without sacrificing quality"

Sorry, this link was already given.

Photoshop is great for resizing. Not sure why you would want to resize a 20MP file for a print that small. What is it equivalent to, 150ppi or something like that?

etienjones · « **Reply #5 on:** February 25, 2012, 13:33 »

I have read more than once that if you resize using Photoshop it is best to increase at 10% increments.

I tested this procedure against Genuine Fractals once and found only marginal difference but GF was the winner.

I am talking about up sizing 100%, not more. There is the argument that the larger the image the further back you view it. Most of us here have grown accustom to analyzing the quality of a photo at 100% in PS which is way too much quality control for most occasions including prints.

digitalexpressionimages · « **Reply #6 on:** February 25, 2012, 15:38 »

300 dpi is just a number. As far as resolution goes, 300 dpi is considered high res because in offset printing dots are plotted on metal plates in rows, each colour at a different angle. The rows are placed at a particular density, lines per inch or LPI and to avoid moiré pattern the resolution of your image needs to be an even multiple of the line screen density. Most presses run 150LPI which means a high res image would be an even multiple of that. 450dpi is too much and you would never notice the extra image resolution so 300 dpi is the winner. Some might be surprised to know that many magazines use a line screen of 133LPI which means hi-res for a mag is 266dpi. Newspapers use a wide array of screens but a typical density is about 85LPI which means, believe it or not, 170dpi is hi-res in the newspaper biz.

These numbers only matter because of the printing process. Remove that process and the numbers mean nothing. In Stochastic printing, ink is applied to the page in a spatterlike pattern making the need for lines of dots, moiré and 300dpi pointless. Inkjet printers use a process similar to stochastic. That means that if an image looks good to the eye, it's high res. I have printed photos on an inkjet with as low as resolution as 100dpi (ppi) and they look great. A 5D mk11 can deliver 36x54" prints at 100dpi without the need to upsize. If you do upsize to the 40" you want, you won't have to go up much. I doubt you'll see a loss in quality.

RacePhoto · « **Reply #7 on:** February 25, 2012, 17:45 »

What ISO did you shoot the pictures at? If 100 or 50 then you can make bigger prints.

What's the viewing distance? You can print a billboard from a 6MP shot, if it's going to be viewed from the highway.

As others have pointed out, how will they be printed, with what kind of printer on what kind of surface?

GF or anything else is a waste of money! And doing incremental upsizing is over a decade out of date and unnecessary. Both may have made a difference in 1999, but technology has advanced, software didn't just stagnate at the point it was when Photoshop was invented. Things keep improving and changing.

It's not all that complicated and not all that easy. I'm saying the best answer is make a print and see. The reason it can be complicated is all the variables, some of which are mythology and some just interesting math. All the theory is fine but when you see a physical print, that's your answer.

I have a 8x10 from my Sony Mavica 7 that's just fine. In theory that's impossible. We're talking under 1MP - 640x480 image. But because of the exposure, and subject, it looks fine. Most everything else from that camera at 4x6 is pixilated has halos and in general is Ugly by modern standards. (really cool when I first had it)

5D good lens, low ISO, correct exposure and balance, modern printer on photo paper... 40" x ?? shouldn't be a problem.

fotoroad · « **Reply #8 on:** March 25, 2012, 10:31 »

24x18inch printed canvas is very very good from 5DII and I belive 40inch long side can be very good

sharpshot · « **Reply #9 on:** March 25, 2012, 14:51 »

Just use bicubic smoother with photoshop. I tried a few of the resizing programs and the difference wasn't noticeable. I sometimes make a print from a small section of the enlarged file and look at it from the distance I would view the big enlargement. That's a cheap way to make sure it will be OK. Lots of photographers are obsessed with looking at big enlargements from a few inches away but non-photographers don't do that, they stand a good distance away. People don't look at their 40 inch TV's from a few inches away.

rinderart · « **Reply #10 on:** March 25, 2012, 16:01 »

One of my business's is doing large prints for gallerie shows and office installations . genuine fractals is the way to go. Heck they used to do Billboards from 35MM. Like said it's about viewing distance.

rubyroo · « **Reply #11 on:** March 25, 2012, 16:25 »

I just googled Genuine Fractals and it sounds fantastic. I may well buy that myself at some point. Even though the answer was meant for the OP, I just wanted to say thanks for the tip.

ShadySue · « **Reply #12 on:** March 25, 2012, 18:21 »

Quote from: rubyroo on March 25, 2012, 16:25

I just googled Genuine Fractals and it sounds fantastic. I may well buy that myself at some point. Even though the answer was meant for the OP, I just wanted to say thanks for the tip.

Check the demo (assuming there is one) against Photoshop and decide if it's worth the extra.

rubyroo · « **Reply #13 on:** March 26, 2012, 05:26 »

Point taken Sue, I'll wait 'til I upgrade to CS6 and then compare (if I can find a way to do that). It'll be a while though, as I don't like to upgrade immediately and would rather wait a bit until any bugs come to light and get resolved.

MatHayward · « **Reply #14 on:** March 26, 2012, 19:12 »

I have printed 24X36 prints with my 11mp files and had no issues. A friend of mine used his files from a 1D Mark II and had them blown up literally to stadium size. Ground to ceiling at Century Link Field (Home of the Seahawks) with player images and they looked amazing. You should not need to upsize your 5d files for a 40 inch print in my opinion. I would call my lab and ask them what they think before investing in any software.

Good luck,

Mat

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Upsizing for Large Prints (Read 5852 times)

ComfortEagle2095

click_click

jm

etienjones

BaldricksTrousers

etienjones

digitalexpressionimages

RacePhoto

fotoroad

sharpshot

rinderart

rubyroo

ShadySue

rubyroo

MatHayward

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors