«

What is the minimum resolution required for a decent print for a photo print
on photographic paper using a service such as kodak.com

Thanks

"Mike McCloud" <> writes:
>What is the minimum resolution required for a decent print for a photo print
>on photographic paper using a service such as kodak.com

Depends on your standards for "sharp". The usual wisdom from wet
photography days is that the print should resolve 4-8 line pairs per mm,
or about 100-200 line pairs per inch, or 200-400 lines per inch. For
practical digital systems, this requires 300-600 pixels per inch.

But the extra contrast of digital images might let you get away with
somewhat less, say 200 pixels per inch.

Also, note that these are for *good* prints. If you're used to using a
SLR or rangefinder film camera with a tripod and careful focusing,
you'll probably want this level of quality. If you're used to a
handheld point&shoot camera with fast film, your standards may be
considerably lower. It all depends on what you expect.

Dave

"Dave Martindale" <> wrote in

Friend,

Many thanks

Greetings Mike,

I have extracted the following from the Ofoto site (a Kodak Company). It
may help you understand what is expected. Ofoto is in Europe as well.

The Recommended and Not Recommended symbols you see when you place your
order help us (Ofoto) make sure you get the highest quality prints possible
from your photos. Although Ofoto will print any of your photos to the size
you choose, some photos - depending on the number of pixels in the image -
just look better when printed at a specific size.

Use the following general guidelines when sizing images to aspect ratios.

a.. For a 4 x 6" print, the image resolution should be 640 x 480 pixels
minimum
b.. For a 5 x 7" print, the image resolution should be 1024 x 768 pixels
minimum
c.. For an 8 x 10" print, the image resolution should be 1536 x 1024
pixels minimum
d.. For a 16 x 20" print, the image resolution should be 1600 x 1200
pixels minimum
e.. For a 20 x 30" print, the image resolution should be 1600 x 1200
pixels minimum
f.. For a Wallet-size print, the image resolution should be 320 x 240
pixels minimum
For more details on what is expected, I would try going to the Ofoto site
and clicking on the Help feature. This and much more is reviewed for you.

Good luck, Mike, enjoy your printing.

Ron Baird
Eastman Kodak Company



"Mike McCloud" <> wrote in message
news:...
> What is the minimum resolution required for a decent print for a photo
print
> on photographic paper using a service such as kodak.com
>
> Thanks
>
>

Ron Baird wrote:
> Greetings Mike,
>
> I have extracted the following from the Ofoto site (a Kodak Company).
> It may help you understand what is expected. Ofoto is in Europe as
> well.
>
> The Recommended and Not Recommended symbols you see when you place
> your order help us (Ofoto) make sure you get the highest quality
> prints possible from your photos. Although Ofoto will print any of
> your photos to the size you choose, some photos - depending on the
> number of pixels in the image - just look better when printed at a
> specific size.
>
> Use the following general guidelines when sizing images to aspect
> ratios.
>
> a.. For a 4 x 6" print, the image resolution should be 640 x 480
> pixels minimum
> b.. For a 5 x 7" print, the image resolution should be 1024 x 768
> pixels minimum
> c.. For an 8 x 10" print, the image resolution should be 1536 x 1024
> pixels minimum
> d.. For a 16 x 20" print, the image resolution should be 1600 x 1200
> pixels minimum
> e.. For a 20 x 30" print, the image resolution should be 1600 x 1200
> pixels minimum
> f.. For a Wallet-size print, the image resolution should be 320 x
> 240 pixels minimum
> For more details on what is expected, I would try going to the Ofoto
> site and clicking on the Help feature. This and much more is
> reviewed for you.
>
> Good luck, Mike, enjoy your printing.
>
> Ron Baird
> Eastman Kodak Company
>

It was pointed out to me, when I posted a similar list from FotoTime,
that these are MINIMUM minimums, and will usually yield a useful photo,
but that they are very generous if you are trying for something
exhibitable. I was reminded that such a list is biased in favor of the
purveyor of prints, since they want to sell more and bigger, and move
the discouraging word down the scale. Or is it up the scale. I'm sure
you-all understand.

--
Frank ess

"Ron Baird" <> writes:
> "Mike McCloud" <> wrote:

>> What is the minimum resolution required for a decent print for
>> a photo print on photographic paper using a service such as
>> kodak.com

> I have extracted the following from the Ofoto site (a Kodak
> Company). It may help you understand what is expected.
> Ofoto is in Europe as well.
>
> The Recommended and Not Recommended symbols you see when you place
> your order help us (Ofoto) make sure you get the highest quality
> prints possible from your photos. Although Ofoto will print any of
> your photos to the size you choose, some photos - depending on the
> number of pixels in the image - just look better when printed at a
> specific size.
>
> Use the following general guidelines when sizing images to aspect
> ratios.

If one work out the resolution for the Ofoto recommended sizes in
ppi(I've shortened the text for better readability with a fixed
font), one gets:

a. For a 4 x 6" print, use 640 x 480 px minimum => 107 ppi
b. For a 5 x 7" print, use 1024 x 768 px minimum => 146 ppi
c. For an 8 x 10" print, use 1536 x 1024 px minimum => 154 ppi
d. For a 16 x 20" print, use 1600 x 1200 px minimum => 80 ppi
e. For a 20 x 30" print, use 1600 x 1200 px minimum => 53 ppi
f. For Wallet-size (2x3) use 320 x 240 px minimum => 107 ppi

YMMV - but to me, this does not look right.

At 53 ppi the result will look very, very blurry and even 154 ppi
is pushing it in my book (I'd say 240 ppi in the minimum for
acceptable quality prints).

There are some weird recommendations with respect to AR as well.
1600 x 1200 is 4:3 - but 30 x 20" is 3:2.

Ron, I suggest that you raise this inside Kodak and get the
quality control people to look at those guidelines.
--
- gisle hannemyr [ gisle{at}hannemyr.no - http://folk.uio.no/gisle/ ]
================================================== ======================
«To live outside the law, you must be honest.» (Bob Dylan)

Gisle Hannemyr wrote:

> "Ron Baird" <> writes:
>
>>"Mike McCloud" <> wrote:
>
>
>>>What is the minimum resolution required for a decent print for
>>>a photo print on photographic paper using a service such as
>>>kodak.com
>
>
>>I have extracted the following from the Ofoto site (a Kodak
>>Company). It may help you understand what is expected.
>>Ofoto is in Europe as well.
>>
>>The Recommended and Not Recommended symbols you see when you place
>>your order help us (Ofoto) make sure you get the highest quality
>>prints possible from your photos. Although Ofoto will print any of
>>your photos to the size you choose, some photos - depending on the
>>number of pixels in the image - just look better when printed at a
>>specific size.
>>
>>Use the following general guidelines when sizing images to aspect
>>ratios.
>
>
> If one work out the resolution for the Ofoto recommended sizes in
> ppi(I've shortened the text for better readability with a fixed
> font), one gets:
>
> a. For a 4 x 6" print, use 640 x 480 px minimum => 107 ppi
> b. For a 5 x 7" print, use 1024 x 768 px minimum => 146 ppi
> c. For an 8 x 10" print, use 1536 x 1024 px minimum => 154 ppi
> d. For a 16 x 20" print, use 1600 x 1200 px minimum => 80 ppi
> e. For a 20 x 30" print, use 1600 x 1200 px minimum => 53 ppi
> f. For Wallet-size (2x3) use 320 x 240 px minimum => 107 ppi
>
> YMMV - but to me, this does not look right.
>
> At 53 ppi the result will look very, very blurry and even 154 ppi
> is pushing it in my book (I'd say 240 ppi in the minimum for
> acceptable quality prints).

Even for a 20x30? In what environment? If that pic is going in an exhibition,
people will get up close and personal, but for viewing from several metres away
150 ppi should be sufficient. I think your statement was too general.

> There are some weird recommendations with respect to AR as well.
> 1600 x 1200 is 4:3 - but 30 x 20" is 3:2.

Yeah. Why don't they specify the picture sizes in the correct ratio and indicate
that cropping will occur otherwise. For example, for a 5 x 7" print, use
1024 x 731.
>
> Ron, I suggest that you raise this inside Kodak and get the
> quality control people to look at those guidelines.

I agree.
--
Ben Thomas
Opinions, conclusions, and other information in this message that do not
relate to the official business of my firm shall be understood as neither
given nor endorsed by it.

Gisle Hannemyr wrote:
> "Ron Baird" <> writes:
>
>>"Mike McCloud" <> wrote:
>
>
>>>What is the minimum resolution required for a decent print for
>>>a photo print on photographic paper using a service such as
>>>kodak.com
>
>
>>I have extracted the following from the Ofoto site (a Kodak
>>Company). It may help you understand what is expected.
>>Ofoto is in Europe as well.
>>
>>The Recommended and Not Recommended symbols you see when you place
>>your order help us (Ofoto) make sure you get the highest quality
>>prints possible from your photos. Although Ofoto will print any of
>>your photos to the size you choose, some photos - depending on the
>>number of pixels in the image - just look better when printed at a
>>specific size.
>>
>>Use the following general guidelines when sizing images to aspect
>>ratios.
>
>
> If one work out the resolution for the Ofoto recommended sizes in
> ppi(I've shortened the text for better readability with a fixed
> font), one gets:
>
> a. For a 4 x 6" print, use 640 x 480 px minimum => 107 ppi
> b. For a 5 x 7" print, use 1024 x 768 px minimum => 146 ppi
> c. For an 8 x 10" print, use 1536 x 1024 px minimum => 154 ppi
> d. For a 16 x 20" print, use 1600 x 1200 px minimum => 80 ppi
> e. For a 20 x 30" print, use 1600 x 1200 px minimum => 53 ppi
> f. For Wallet-size (2x3) use 320 x 240 px minimum => 107 ppi
>
> YMMV - but to me, this does not look right.
>
> At 53 ppi the result will look very, very blurry and even 154 ppi
> is pushing it in my book (I'd say 240 ppi in the minimum for
> acceptable quality prints).
>
> There are some weird recommendations with respect to AR as well.
> 1600 x 1200 is 4:3 - but 30 x 20" is 3:2.
>
> Ron, I suggest that you raise this inside Kodak and get the
> quality control people to look at those guidelines.

Good points, but wouldn't they (also) have software and hardware that
can scale up with minimum artifacts, well beyond what even an expert in
PS with the best stepping up scaler?

--

John McWilliams

"John McWilliams" <> wrote in message
news:0H24d.343886$8_6.61983@attbi_s04...
SNIP
> Good points, but wouldn't they (also) have software and
> hardware that can scale up with minimum artifacts, well
> beyond what even an expert in PS with the best stepping
> up scaler?

That's what Qimage (http://www.ddisoftware.com/qimage/) is for, and
the price is hard to beat as well. It takes a bit getting used to the
user interface, but it rocks, and the service (new features and
support) is phenomenal.

Bart

Bart van der Wolf wrote:
> "John McWilliams" <> wrote in message
> news:0H24d.343886$8_6.61983@attbi_s04...
> SNIP
>
>>Good points, but wouldn't they (also) have software and
>>hardware that can scale up with minimum artifacts, well
>>beyond what even an expert in PS with the best stepping
>>up scaler?
>
>
> That's what Qimage (http://www.ddisoftware.com/qimage/) is for, and
> the price is hard to beat as well. It takes a bit getting used to the
> user interface, but it rocks, and the service (new features and
> support) is phenomenal.
>
Darn. From their site:
>
for Windows 95/98/NT/2000/ME/XP Operating Systems,
Linux systems running Wine, and Macs running Virtual PC
This page has had 1.5MM hits since May, 1997

If (when) I get a Mac G-5, I might be tempted to try VPC again, but it's
too slow on my G-4, I am certain, tho' never having tried it since my
G-3 days.

Also, don't the labs have super duper hardware that's better? (A
question, not a statement.)

john