max print size with 6.3 MPixel camera ??

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Beowulf, Jul 28, 2004.

  1. Beowulf

    Beowulf Guest

    I have a Canon EOS 10D digital camera (6.3 megapixels). Wondering what
    is the largest print size I dare try for getting a nice enlarged print.
    Info on web seems confusing. I have tried a 12x18 inch enlargment print
    and that looks nice. Dare I go to 16x20 or would that be a waste of money?
    Image for printing shows up in PhotoShop (actually GIMP as I use Linux
    instead of Windows) as a roughly 2000x3000 pixel image. If I want 16x20
    prints will I need to think about getting a better digital SLR?

    ~Beowulf
     
    Beowulf, Jul 28, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Beowulf

    Robertwgross Guest

    There are no precise standards for this. However, if you can get 300 dpi on the
    print, or something close to that, then it ought to be good. Conventional
    wisdom is that you ought to be able to do 11x14 or 11x17 prints easily. Once
    you get to 16x20 or 16x24, it gets more difficult. If you do some intelligent
    interpolation, you can get to 30x40 or larger. I've seen 30x40 prints that were
    indistinguishable from film prints, but a lot of interpolation work went into
    getting them.

    ---Bob Gross---
     
    Robertwgross, Jul 28, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Beowulf

    Beowulf Guest

    On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 18:00:04 +0000, Robertwgross wrote:
    ,,
    Sounds like I might get a somewhat decent 16x20, but I will thing more
    along the lines of 12x18 and also think of moving up to a larger megapixel
    camera in a year or so as prices come down. I will ask the photofinisher
    also to see what they find in their experience-- they are great, they have
    equipment to print digital to up to 12x18 on actual photo paper with
    actual photo process (not inkjet); beyond 12x18 they use inkjet; they
    really seem to have invested in doing quality digital. Hopefully they can
    do 16x20, maybe I will try one just to see how far I can push the limits
    of my EOS 10D and its 6.3 megapixels.
     
    Beowulf, Jul 28, 2004
    #3
  4. Beowulf,

    don't give in all too easily. 6 Megapixels are quite a lot, and
    the secret is in the upscaling. Some printer drivers and some
    programs using algorithms like Lanczos are doing well (even
    IrfanView can do it), but the king of the hill seems to be a
    program by Extensis called pxl SmartScale
    (www.extensis.com/pxlsmartscale/).

    That program not only scales up, it also redraws high-contrast
    edges in the higher resolution, so pictures usually look
    incredibly good.

    If you test the 30 day trial version, please report your results
    here. You're not the only one who is interested in this.

    Hans-Georg
     
    Hans-Georg Michna, Jul 28, 2004
    #4
  5. Yup = I was gonna suggest the self same thing: Lanczos in IrfanView (a free
    software program) and do a side by side comparison

    Perhaps by cropping a small area of the original image and printing at a
    smaller page size?

    Arts
     
    Arty Phacting, Jul 28, 2004
    #5
  6. Beowulf

    Beowulf Guest

    Couldn't I crop a section of one of my 6.3MP images and have it printed
    at the local photofinisher to for example even a 5x7 to see how well the
    entire image would print to 16x20. Not sure if this makes sense, not sure
    how to do the math to pick the right size crop, but it seems to make some
    sense logically.
     
    Beowulf, Jul 28, 2004
    #6
  7. Beowulf

    Skroob Guest

    You could simply, in Photoshop for example, increase the image size to 16x20
    then reduce the canvas size down to 5x7 to get your sample.
     
    Skroob, Jul 28, 2004
    #7
  8. Yeh - I couldn't be bothered with the math too

    Without the words I think we know what we mean

    Arts

    telepathy will do away with keyboards :)


    ps - it would seem OK doing 16x20 comparisons if you is well-reaourced in
    the paper printing department.

    Doing interpolation on a crop - a nice crop - might indicate what algorithm
    may work best on your system

    A
     
    Arty Phacting, Jul 29, 2004
    #8
  9. Nice Skroob - that sounds even better = no math

    would it introduce any losses though?

    A

     
    Arty Phacting, Jul 29, 2004
    #9
  10. Beowulf

    Tom Scales Guest

    Or just use Photoshop CS. I have printed a number of 24x36 prints on my
    Epson 7600 from my Nikon D100. CS does a great job of upscaling. I use Nik
    Sharpener Pro for the final sharpen prior to printing.

    Interestingly, the results are BETTER from the D100 (and D70) than from 35mm
    negatives scanned on my Nikon 4000ED film scanner

    Tom
     
    Tom Scales, Jul 29, 2004
    #10
  11. Beowulf

    Jim Dawson Guest

    But be sure to view it from the same distance that you would
    view the 16x20 or it won't be representative of the true quality.

    Jim

     
    Jim Dawson, Jul 29, 2004
    #11
  12. Beowulf

    D.R. Guest

    Sorry, but it's gotta be said "imagine a beowulf cluster of 10D's" and "Does it
    (10D) run Linux?"... ;-)
     
    D.R., Jul 29, 2004
    #12
  13. Beowulf

    Ron Hunter Guest

    If you are really discriminating (picky), then divide the resolution
    figures by 300 and you will have the size in inches. If you are not so
    discriminating, then 200 will do, depending on the subject, and the
    normal viewing distance for the print.
     
    Ron Hunter, Jul 29, 2004
    #13
  14. Beowulf

    Ron Hunter Guest

    Once you get to using an inkjet printer, you are also at the mercy of
    the printer driver. Fortunately, most of them do quite a good job of
    rendering the picture well.
     
    Ron Hunter, Jul 29, 2004
    #14
  15. If you res your picture up to 16x20 at 300 dpi and it still looks OK then it
    will print well. In Photoshop if you increase the resolution by 10% at a
    time it will tend to retain detail better.

    There is also a program called Genuine Fractals that does a very good job of
    enlarging a picture without it pixelating. You can also have your picture
    enlarged on a LightJet printer and it will interpolate in a way similar to
    Genuine Fractals.

    As a rule a CLOSE UP of a person or a thing will enlarge MUCH better than
    something like a landscape picture with lots of small detail.
     
    Mark Kovalcson, Jul 29, 2004
    #15
  16. Beowulf

    G.T. Guest

    I've done 16x20s with my 6MP DR. They look great.

    Greg
     
    G.T., Jul 29, 2004
    #16
  17. Beowulf

    Crownfield Guest

    20x30 looks great.
     
    Crownfield, Jul 29, 2004
    #17
  18. Should go to 16x20 with no problem, if it was taken with a tripod then
    20x24.
     
    Randall Ainsworth, Jul 29, 2004
    #18
  19. Beowulf

    DJ Guest

    That sounds like a very sensible call to me.

    You should also consider the intended viewing distance. I've taken to getting
    "up close and personal" with huge prints in the shopping mall (you know, bra ads
    and the like :) and the quality close up is very variable. Usually those things
    are done on a printing press and show a screen close up, but from a normal
    viewing distance a lot of them are just fine.
     
    DJ, Jul 29, 2004
    #19
  20. I've got a beautiful 16x24 print from my 6MP Fuji S2. Made from my
    file on an Epson 7600 inkjet printer. Better than I'm used to seeing
    from 35mm film at that size -- partly I think the eye doesn't notice
    *lack* of detail to some extent, but *does* notice extraneous detail
    (grain). Anyway, it looks great. So it's at least sometimes possible
    from 6MP.
     
    David Dyer-Bennet, Jul 29, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.