6MP Nikon D100 - good enough for critical 24" x 36" advertising posters?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by borkomile@hotmail.com, Sep 4, 2005.

  1. Guest

    X-No-Archive: Yes

    I am one of those old mares who has stuck clear of digital, apart from
    a convenience 8MP small-sensor non-SLR P&S which is fine for what I use
    it for.

    A friend of mine uses a Nikon D100 and a couple of AF-D Nikkor zooms.
    He has asked my opinion as to whether that is suitable equipment for an
    assignment to photograph some objects for ADVERTISING POSTERS. The
    poster sizes will be 24 inches x 42 inches (2 ft x 3.5 ft). The
    subject matter will fill almost all of the area of the poster.

    The posters will typically be viewed from a distance of a foot, in shop
    windows and on display stands.

    While I can't tell you what the subject is, pin sharpness of the end
    result is critical for the assignment. Sharpness is an attribute of
    the very thing being advertised.

    The D100 is a 6 megapixel camera, making 3008 x 2000 pixel images in
    its highest resolution mode. It is certainly better than my 8MP P&S
    due to the larger sensor size / better noise, superior lens(es) e.t.c.

    But I just can't see how the D100 can cut it to reach 24" x 42". Even
    assuming that he fills the frame pretty well with the subject so there
    is only a 20% loss through cropping (given the nature and proportions
    of the subject, that would be excellent), that would mean he would need
    to fill 42" with 80% x 3008 = 2406 pixels. That means the "ppi
    resolution" would be no more than 2406/42 ppi = 57 ppi, or just over 2
    pixels per mm.

    Sharpening or interpolating (creating pseudo-detail) software won't
    help much, given the subject.

    I think that 57 ppi is far too little, given the likely viewing
    distances. The general wisdom is that 300 ppi is best for a hand-held
    8" x 10" and 150 ppi may be acceptable for critical work with a viewing
    distance of over a foot. But 57 ppi is nowhere close to 150 ppi, and I
    think the image will look quite pixellated or dotty and, when
    interpolated for printing and the end result viewed as a poster,
    unsharp.

    Given that the advertising posters are aimed at an audience who will
    come up to them and look at them closely (some from closer than a
    foot), can 57 ppi be enough?

    Oh I know ppi and dpi are not the same.

    Please tell me your views. Will the D100 cut it for the assignment? I
    think a modern 11+ MP SLR just might, and certainly if I could stretch
    to a digital back for my Hassy it could. My instincts (more reliable
    than my maths, which isn't too good) would be to shoot it on Kodachrome
    25 (I have a brick holed away in the fridge) or Velvia 50 (grain being
    less important than sharpness for this subject - a little grain may
    even be flattering) or similar, and have it drum scanned for good
    measure. I'd use a 6x6 on a 'pod. Just maybe a 35mm with a good prime
    lens too.

    If I am right, how do I diplomatically tell him this? I value his
    friendship and he does not take criticism well. The assignment means a
    lot to him, and I don't mind loaning him my analogue gear (a modern
    Hassy and/or an almost brand new F6).

    Or is my friend right, and my maths wrong as usual, and the D100 will
    do the job fine?
     
    , Sep 4, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Guest

    X-No-Archive: Yes

    Sorry, ignore this post, I put the poster size down wrongly as 24" x
    36" while it is 24" x 42". Too much working in 35mm, and I told you
    I'm not good with numbers.,.
     
    , Sep 4, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. <> wrote:
    > X-No-Archive: Yes
    >
    > I am one of those old mares who has stuck clear of digital, apart from
    > a convenience 8MP small-sensor non-SLR P&S which is fine for what I use
    > it for.
    >
    > A friend of mine uses a Nikon D100 and a couple of AF-D Nikkor zooms.
    > He has asked my opinion as to whether that is suitable equipment for an
    > assignment to photograph some objects for ADVERTISING POSTERS. The
    > poster sizes will be 24 inches x 42 inches (2 ft x 3.5 ft). The
    > subject matter will fill almost all of the area of the poster.
    >
    > The posters will typically be viewed from a distance of a foot, in shop
    > windows and on display stands.


    I can see the lack of detail in 200 ppi prints at 12" from them. So that
    means that a 200 x 24 x 42 x 200 digital original image would be inadequate
    to your purpose. That's 40MP.

    I'd say a D100 would miss being woefully inadequate by a factor of 7. Not
    even in the same ballpark.

    If you are using film and inspecting from 12", then you should probably plan
    on a 7x enlargement. So that means that you need a 3.4 x 6 inch slide or
    negative.

    Of course, if you don't wan't photographic quality, then you can use a 3MP
    dcam.

    > While I can't tell you what the subject is, pin sharpness of the end
    > result is critical for the assignment. Sharpness is an attribute of
    > the very thing being advertised.


    You need 5x7.

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
     
    David J. Littleboy, Sep 4, 2005
    #3
  4. George Nyman Guest

    Hi,
    from what I can read, you better forget that camera. At best, you can use -
    because you stated that sharpness is the critical topic - a professional
    digital back with 22Mpx on a medium format camera. If you would prefer to
    stick to film, then I would suggest you to use at least a medium format
    (6x7) camera with a slow film (to reduce grain visibility) or better
    4x5inch or 5x7 -
    rgds George Nyman
    http://www.gnyman.com



    wrote:

    > X-No-Archive: Yes
    >
    > I am one of those old mares who has stuck clear of digital, apart from
    > a convenience 8MP small-sensor non-SLR P&S which is fine for what I use
    > it for.
    >
    > A friend of mine uses a Nikon D100 and a couple of AF-D Nikkor zooms.
    > He has asked my opinion as to whether that is suitable equipment for an
    > assignment to photograph some objects for ADVERTISING POSTERS. The
    > poster sizes will be 24 inches x 42 inches (2 ft x 3.5 ft). The
    > subject matter will fill almost all of the area of the poster.
    >
    > The posters will typically be viewed from a distance of a foot, in shop
    > windows and on display stands.
    >
    > While I can't tell you what the subject is, pin sharpness of the end
    > result is critical for the assignment. Sharpness is an attribute of
    > the very thing being advertised.
    >
    > The D100 is a 6 megapixel camera, making 3008 x 2000 pixel images in
    > its highest resolution mode. It is certainly better than my 8MP P&S
    > due to the larger sensor size / better noise, superior lens(es) e.t.c.
    >
    > But I just can't see how the D100 can cut it to reach 24" x 42". Even
    > assuming that he fills the frame pretty well with the subject so there
    > is only a 20% loss through cropping (given the nature and proportions
    > of the subject, that would be excellent), that would mean he would need
    > to fill 42" with 80% x 3008 = 2406 pixels. That means the "ppi
    > resolution" would be no more than 2406/42 ppi = 57 ppi, or just over 2
    > pixels per mm.
    >
    > Sharpening or interpolating (creating pseudo-detail) software won't
    > help much, given the subject.
    >
    > I think that 57 ppi is far too little, given the likely viewing
    > distances. The general wisdom is that 300 ppi is best for a hand-held
    > 8" x 10" and 150 ppi may be acceptable for critical work with a viewing
    > distance of over a foot. But 57 ppi is nowhere close to 150 ppi, and I
    > think the image will look quite pixellated or dotty and, when
    > interpolated for printing and the end result viewed as a poster,
    > unsharp.
    >
    > Given that the advertising posters are aimed at an audience who will
    > come up to them and look at them closely (some from closer than a
    > foot), can 57 ppi be enough?
    >
    > Oh I know ppi and dpi are not the same.
    >
    > Please tell me your views. Will the D100 cut it for the assignment? I
    > think a modern 11+ MP SLR just might, and certainly if I could stretch
    > to a digital back for my Hassy it could. My instincts (more reliable
    > than my maths, which isn't too good) would be to shoot it on Kodachrome
    > 25 (I have a brick holed away in the fridge) or Velvia 50 (grain being
    > less important than sharpness for this subject - a little grain may
    > even be flattering) or similar, and have it drum scanned for good
    > measure. I'd use a 6x6 on a 'pod. Just maybe a 35mm with a good prime
    > lens too.
    >
    > If I am right, how do I diplomatically tell him this? I value his
    > friendship and he does not take criticism well. The assignment means a
    > lot to him, and I don't mind loaning him my analogue gear (a modern
    > Hassy and/or an almost brand new F6).
    >
    > Or is my friend right, and my maths wrong as usual, and the D100 will
    > do the job fine?
     
    George Nyman, Sep 4, 2005
    #4
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. VT
    Replies:
    43
    Views:
    1,722
  2. The Dude

    D100 and Rebel WTF??? 6MP vs 3MP Opinions please....

    The Dude, Jan 6, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    51
    Views:
    1,224
    Manfred von Richthofen
    Jan 14, 2004
  3. john chapman

    Rechargeable AA Batteries in MB-D100 for Nikon D100

    john chapman, Aug 19, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    725
    Ed Ruf
    Aug 19, 2004
  4. Replies:
    29
    Views:
    765
  5. Giuen
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,148
    Giuen
    Sep 12, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page