Re: Resolution for 8 x 10

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by HRosita, Aug 22, 2003.

  1. HRosita

    HRosita Guest

    Hi,

    the 300 PPI "rule" is just a guideline.
    Good images printed with good printers, especially the large commercial ones
    need less resolution.
    My first digital camera was an Agfa e1280 (1.280 MP) and i have 8x10 pictures
    hanging on the wall printed with an Epson 1200 at 720 DPI that are very
    pleasing.

    I guess I am just not critical enough. But then I don't pretend to take museum
    quality images.
    Rosita
    HRosita, Aug 22, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. HRosita

    Stuart Guest

    I'll chime in on this as well. For some rather convoluted reasons, I
    just printed a 16x20 from a 4 MP consumer digicam. With cropping, the
    final jpeg uploaded to ezprints ended up being around 95 ppi for this
    size of print.

    I expected it to be quite poor. It is actually quite satisfactory.
    The average viewer (perhaps NOT the average photographer) would find
    no major faults with it.

    Yes, the 8x10 of the same image looks better than the 16x20 -- but not
    as much better as you might have been coached to expect.

    I don't know whether ezprints uses Norita, or Fuji Frontier or what
    but I _have_ learned that it is definitely better to send them a low
    resolution image than it is to "rez it up" in Photoshop first. In
    short, their process does a better job of "making up" pixels than
    mine.

    FWIW, their site resolution guide certainly indicates that you should
    expect an "Outstanding Print" from 4 MP up to 20x30! (Not that I've
    tried ... yet). They do provide this small disclaimer: "All files,
    sizes and print quality were determined by their camera's highest
    resolution setting using the standard 7:1 JPEG ratio"

    Ref: http://www.ezprints.com/help/ResolutionGuide.asp

    Note that they consider .7 MP (768 x 1024) enough for an 8x12
    "Outstanding Print". Thats around 85 ppi. Had I not seen the results
    of my 16x20 experiment, I would have thought that a terrible joke.
    Now, I'm wondering ... "how low can you go?"


    Stuart



    On 22 Aug 2003 12:20:26 GMT, et (HRosita) wrote:

    >Hi,
    >
    >the 300 PPI "rule" is just a guideline.
    >Good images printed with good printers, especially the large commercial ones
    >need less resolution.
    >My first digital camera was an Agfa e1280 (1.280 MP) and i have 8x10 pictures
    >hanging on the wall printed with an Epson 1200 at 720 DPI that are very
    >pleasing.
    >
    >I guess I am just not critical enough. But then I don't pretend to take museum
    >quality images.
    >Rosita
    >
    Stuart, Aug 22, 2003
    #2
    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. Jack Yeazel

    ISO Resolution Chart and Printing Resolution

    Jack Yeazel, Aug 12, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    3,265
    Jack Yeazel
    Aug 12, 2003
  2. Simon

    Resolution resolution

    Simon, Feb 26, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    461
    Simon
    Feb 27, 2004
  3. slonkak

    LCD TV resolution / DVD resolution ?

    slonkak, Nov 13, 2006, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,184
    slonkak
    Nov 13, 2006
  4. hassy_user
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    779
    Bart van der Wolf
    Oct 27, 2004
  5. Giuen
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    865
    Giuen
    Sep 12, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page