| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/03/2002 04:32:41 PM · #1 |
I have a Sony DSC-F707. Which is the largest I can print (and I mean LARGEST) pictures taken with this camera.
Is there any high quality post-processing that I can do to the images in order to explode them and still have excelent quality when printing??
|
|
|
|
06/03/2002 04:49:40 PM · #2 |
| You did not state the resolution of the camera. Two hundred DPI is the standard for photo quality. Divide your camera resolution by 200 dpi to get an idea. Example 1000x1400 pixels would yield photo quality 5x7 inch prints. Some people are happy with less than 200 dpi, but this is the minimum standard. Photoshop, and some other programs can "interpolate" data, and with the use of sharpening filters, may allow you to print larger images. Of course, this depends on the quality of the original image, and what your own tastes. Also, benchmarks for enlargements are given for "viewing distance" which would be measured in feet for a large print. An 11x14 in print may seem disapointing when held in your hand, but look fantastic up on the wall from 6 feet away. |
|
|
|
06/03/2002 04:56:41 PM · #3 |
I just looked up your camera. Nice one! 1920x2560 pixels. I would guess, that you could get an 11x14 from a really good, sharp image pretty easily. I have never printed any thing that big, but my advice would be to shoot in TIFF mode. You may even be able to go a size bigger if you or someone you know if good at Photoshop. But 11x14 is reaching the limits of even a good 35mm negative in my opinion.
|
|
|
|
06/03/2002 06:24:22 PM · #4 |
Originally posted by w.brian.martin:
I just looked up your camera. Nice one! 1920x2560 pixels. I would guess, that you could get an 11x14 from a really good, sharp image pretty easily. I have never printed any thing that big, but my advice would be to shoot in TIFF mode. You may even be able to go a size bigger if you or someone you know if good at Photoshop. But 11x14 is reaching the limits of even a good 35mm negative in my opinion.
It all depends on viewing distance. The 'pixels' on billboards you see in the street are huge - but you aren't expected to look at them close up.
I've several prints from digital done at 20"x30" that are excellent and
only really show grain/pixelation at close range. If it is going to be
a print on the wall that you can get really close to 11x14 is probably
about as good as you can get.
If it is something that is only going be viewed from more than a couple of feet away then you can go bigger than 20x30 without any problems.
You need to be careful how you prep the image and if you want to do any
resizing or sharpening prior to printing. When I've done this in the
past I used a stepped resizing algorithm, from www.fredmiranda.com
Other ways include using QImage Pro or Genuine Fractals to do the resizing then apply sharpening later.
Again, all this depends on what sort of quality you finally expect
|
|
|
|
06/03/2002 06:25:30 PM · #5 |
I have the F707 also and I can't get much bettern than 175dpi output to the printer on a 10x13 from a 5 megapixel image...
|
|
|
|
06/03/2002 06:42:32 PM · #6 |
| Of course 175 is the max w/o some interpolation. 1920pixels/200p/inch is 9.6inches. But the 200 number is just a rule of thumb. How did the prints look? I would really like to know. |
|
|
|
06/03/2002 06:46:43 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by w.brian.martin:
Of course 175 is the max w/o some interpolation. 1920pixels/200p/inch is 9.6inches. But the 200 number is just a rule of thumb. How did the prints look? I would really like to know.
I haven't actually tried the 10x13 print yet.. I'm still trying to decide whether to use matte paper or the high gloss paper.. The 175 dpi figure just comes from the output size I get when i resize the image to 10x13" in the software. I *do* get excellent quality prints at 8x10.. usually well over 225 dpi and they do look excellent on the high gloss paper...
|
|
|
|
06/03/2002 07:00:41 PM · #8 |
You'll have different requirements for printing on an inkjet pinter or sending to photo service for output to photo paper.
I have output a 20x30" image to photo paper at 200 ppi (i.e. 4000 x 6000 pixels - about 5MB in JPEG) with acceptable results (looking at it like a poster, from a couple of feet away). I've taken images from my Olympus (1600 x 1200) and re-sampled up either 150% or 200% in Photoshop, then cropped to the finished size.
If you're going to print to inkjet or laser printers which use halftone dots, you should hve twice as many pixels/inch as halftone-dots/inch. |
|
|
|
06/06/2002 02:31:47 PM · #9 |
The best way to find out is to actually print some images and see what you think. What everyone''s saying about resolution, interpolation, etc. is true, but the type of image makes a difference also. I''ve made 11 x 14 prints of some images made with a 2mp Nikon950 that turned out quite well, and others made with a Canon G2 4mp that wouldn''t stand up to 8 x 10. You can cut the expense of burning two or three packs of A3 paper and a couple sets of inkjet cartridges by cropping into a photo at different levels and compositing four crops on one A4 or letter size page. Do the same for differrent unsharp mask settings and pictures of diffenent amount of detail and see for yourself what you think.
* This message has been edited by the author on 6/6/2002 6:34:04 PM.
|
|
|
|
06/06/2002 04:02:58 PM · #10 |
Exactly!
Originally posted by sheyingshi88:
The best way to find out is to actually print some images and see what you think. What everyone''s saying about resolution, interpolation, etc. is true, but the type of image makes a difference also. I''ve made 11 x 14 prints of some images made with a 2mp Nikon950 that turned out quite well, and others made with a Canon G2 4mp that wouldn''t stand up to 8 x 10. You can cut the expense of burning two or three packs of A3 paper and a couple sets of inkjet cartridges by cropping into a photo at different levels and compositing four crops on one A4 or letter size page. Do the same for differrent unsharp mask settings and pictures of diffenent amount of detail and see for yourself what you think.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/09/2025 05:20:52 AM EDT.
