large prints with k-30

jrcastillo · 11-07-2013, 12:01 AM

I am looking to gift a big family photo to my parents in law. I am thinking about the metal one from adoramapix. something like the 16x24 or larger.

I was wondering, a Picture taken with my K-30, using DA 50mm 1.8 at around f4, ISO 100... How big can I go?

side question:
If you have ordered the metal prints from adoramapix, is it worth it? any other vendor recommendation for metal prints?

Thanks!

SyncGuy · 11-07-2013, 12:21 AM

Lemme have a go at this.. Pretty new to printing but i am in the same EXACT position as you are now... Haha!

Just shot a family outdoor shoot using the K30 with the intention of printing big. Other than the ISO and aperture and whatever-else, from what i understand, the basics of printing are:

1) What will be the viewing distance? This is important because it will lead to the next question.

2) With the viewing distance in mind, decide on the DPI to be printed out. 100 DPI? 200 DPI? 300 DPI?

3) With the decided DPI in relation to the viewing distance, divide the picture's resolution after consideration of cropping by the DPI.
e.g. 3000 x 2000 / 300 DPI = 10" x 6.7"

And there you have it, the best largest print (subjective) if printing at 300 DPI for the native image resolution of 3000 x 2000 will be 10 inch at the longest side.

Do correct me if i am wrong... I wish to learn too so that i may start printing mine!

**Miguel** · 11-07-2013, 12:31 AM

300 PPI is a rather magic number that is not necessary for large prints.

For the OP, I would see what Adorama's requirements are. If your image is reasonably well exposed and in focus, you should be able to go to 36-inches on the longest side. The question is do you really need to? The framing would be pricey; few people have available wall space; and super-large family portraits like that aren't often appropriate at that large size (some landscapes or still lifes certainly). I would see what size your in-laws already have and like, and if you can case out their place for wall space. Or ask your spouse.

RE: metal prints, it's a matter of taste. Would it fit in to your in-laws decorating scheme? They are pretty cool in feel, some would say emotionless. I've seen good winter waterfall shots in metal. The look gets tiresome when there are a lot of them together, but that's just me. I'd consider multiple output options, the choices we have today are almost stress inducing.

M

**dms** · 11-07-2013, 12:49 AM

I regularly print about 20"tx30" from my K20D.

SyncGuy · 11-07-2013, 01:09 AM

Originally posted by Miguel

300 PPI is a rather magic number that is not necessary for large prints.

For the OP, I would see what Adorama's requirements are. If your image is reasonably well exposed and in focus, you should be able to go to 36-inches on the longest side. The question is do you really need to? The framing would be pricey; few people have available wall space; and super-large family portraits like that aren't often appropriate at that large size (some landscapes or still lifes certainly). I would see what size your in-laws already have and like, and if you can case out their place for wall space. Or ask your spouse.

RE: metal prints, it's a matter of taste. Would it fit in to your in-laws decorating scheme? They are pretty cool in feel, some would say emotionless. I've seen good winter waterfall shots in metal. The look gets tiresome when there are a lot of them together, but that's just me. I'd consider multiple output options, the choices we have today are almost stress inducing.

M

Hi Miguel,

Yea, noted of that as i'm just giving a rough example from what i understand how printing goes about. Could you advise on your workflow to help decide what are the appropriate settings for differing sizes?

jrcastillo · 11-07-2013, 01:27 AM

Originally posted by Miguel

The framing would be pricey

one thing: I am talking about the metal prints, not metallic paper. Aluminyzed Metal Prints - Online Digital Printing, Professional Aluminyzed Metal Prints - AdoramaPix
As i understand, these come with a mount and no framing is required. Yes they're pricey! a 20x30 is $135 compared to sub $100 for canvas wrap around.

Originally posted by dms

I regularly print about 20"tx30" from my K20D.

Knowing this, i think i might go for the 20x30... I will look around as they had a coupon for 30% off that barely ended

Hope I can find another one

Joojoo2010 · 11-07-2013, 06:24 AM

150ppi is just fine for large prints

**Canada_Rockies** · 11-07-2013, 11:39 AM

I have printed a metallic 20x30 inch print from my K10d, and it is very good indeed, even when peered at from a foot away. I had mine done my MPix. Customer is ecstatic - what can I say?

jrcastillo · 11-07-2013, 11:46 AM

Originally posted by Canada_Rockies

I had mine done my MPix

i was looking in their website.. i can't find the metal prints

Photo Printing, Photo Cards, Holiday Cards, Announcements, Photo Books : Mpix

**Canada_Rockies** · 11-07-2013, 12:26 PM

I had mine done a couple of years ago; I wonder if they stopped doing them?

**RGlasel** · 11-07-2013, 01:58 PM

People will look closer at a large print, out of curiosity, than a smaller, handheld size and we have the ability to switch our focus from small to large and back again, so bigger prints definitely need to be sharper than smaller ones. Inkjet printing is a process of laying down microscopic dots in 3 to 6 or more different colours close enough together that our brain merges them together. Our perception of resolution or clarity depends a lot on the amount of contrast between neighbouring regions, the reflectiveness of the paper used and the smoothness of lines. The DPI of the digital image will affect the smoothness of lines, and I can see differences between a 150 DPI image and a 240 DPI image. MacBook Pro's with a 15" Retina display have 220 DPI, the latest iPhones 326 DPI. So, without upscaling, you are limited to about 20x13 with uncropped photos from your K-30. However, software can do a good job of upscaling the size of the image so lines still look smooth. What upscaling can't do is put more detail in the picture, but realistically the RAW file probably has more detail than the printer can accurately render anyways.

Bottom line, if your photo has good colour contrast and sharp lines, and the printer does a good job of rendering colour, you can have good looking prints that are larger than 20x13, but there are limits. For me the maximum is 30x20, if you want to go bigger than that, you will need to do a lot of digital editing, and your editing will be noticeable, because it will look like it came from a video game.

ScooterMaxi Jim · 11-09-2013, 10:41 AM

While I agree generally with the post above, it is a bit murky to mix screen and print resolutions. However, I agree that on large prints you start running into a digital look if you drop below 240 dpi. Unfortunately, Adobe products are inferior at up-sizing. Products such as Picture Window Pro with Lanczos scaling (preferably 6x6 or 8x8) will perform especially well with a small amount of sharpening in a second step.

How big you can go pretty much depends on the subject matter. Who wants overly sharp detail in a portrait? But for most landscapes, the combination of color depth and noise in low contrast areas makes it far more difficult to achieve a dramatic effect.

**RGlasel** · 11-09-2013, 11:20 AM

Originally posted by ScooterMaxi Jim

it is a bit murky to mix screen and print resolutions

I won't argue that, I included Retina screen resolutions to make the point that just because you can't see individual dots at a lower resolution, doesn't mean a higher resolution won't look better. I definitely agree that if you upscale an image, you should apply some sharpening afterwards, because that makes the image appear to be in focus. Nothing separates professionally done large prints from the rest like sharp borders between the subject and background. As you mention, too much detail in other parts of a portrait is ugly, but that kind of selective blending/blurring often requires manual editing.

stillshot2 · 11-09-2013, 11:50 AM

I recently shot a family portrait at iso 800 indoors with my K30, I think I even cropped it a little bit, and my client had it printed at Costco's photo center to a size of 20x30. Costco isn't the best place to print photos, but at a close viewing distance of 2 feet away the framed photo looks amazing. I also took it with the 18-55 dal kit lens. If you are taking one with the DA 50mm 1.8 at f4 (which I also have) it will be insanely sharp, especially at iso 100. I try and use the 50mm 1.8 often but it was too cramped indoors for it and it was raining outside, and since I didn't have a bounce flash at the time I had to up the iso to 800 with the kit lens. For all my semi professional needs the K30 does everything I need and is a stellar camera.

11-07-2013, 12:01 AM	#1
jrcastillo Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Posts: 161	large prints with k-30 I am looking to gift a big family photo to my parents in law. I am thinking about the metal one from adoramapix. something like the 16x24 or larger. I was wondering, a Picture taken with my K-30, using DA 50mm 1.8 at around f4, ISO 100... How big can I go? side question: If you have ordered the metal prints from adoramapix, is it worth it? any other vendor recommendation for metal prints? Thanks!

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Large prints - learning from your succeses and mistakes	MSL	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	3	08-21-2013 10:23 AM
Sharpening for large prints	sb in ak	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	6	03-24-2013 02:18 AM
K-5 IIs large prints	bkpix	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	10	11-11-2012 06:35 AM
Large prints- raw vs. jpg	chucuyuco	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	96	05-01-2012 07:45 AM
Large prints from k-x	tbirdas	Pentax DSLR Discussion	4	02-13-2011 05:25 AM

11-07-2013, 12:21 AM	#2
SyncGuy Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2011 Posts: 821	Lemme have a go at this.. Pretty new to printing but i am in the same EXACT position as you are now... Haha! Just shot a family outdoor shoot using the K30 with the intention of printing big. Other than the ISO and aperture and whatever-else, from what i understand, the basics of printing are: 1) What will be the viewing distance? This is important because it will lead to the next question. 2) With the viewing distance in mind, decide on the DPI to be printed out. 100 DPI? 200 DPI? 300 DPI? 3) With the decided DPI in relation to the viewing distance, divide the picture's resolution after consideration of cropping by the DPI. e.g. 3000 x 2000 / 300 DPI = 10" x 6.7" And there you have it, the best largest print (subjective) if printing at 300 DPI for the native image resolution of 3000 x 2000 will be 10 inch at the longest side. Do correct me if i am wrong... I wish to learn too so that i may start printing mine!

11-07-2013, 12:31 AM	#3
Miguel Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Near Seattle Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,743	300 PPI is a rather magic number that is not necessary for large prints. For the OP, I would see what Adorama's requirements are. If your image is reasonably well exposed and in focus, you should be able to go to 36-inches on the longest side. The question is do you really need to? The framing would be pricey; few people have available wall space; and super-large family portraits like that aren't often appropriate at that large size (some landscapes or still lifes certainly). I would see what size your in-laws already have and like, and if you can case out their place for wall space. Or ask your spouse. RE: metal prints, it's a matter of taste. Would it fit in to your in-laws decorating scheme? They are pretty cool in feel, some would say emotionless. I've seen good winter waterfall shots in metal. The look gets tiresome when there are a lot of them together, but that's just me. I'd consider multiple output options, the choices we have today are almost stress inducing. M

11-07-2013, 12:49 AM	#4
dms Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: New York, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,192	I regularly print about 20"tx30" from my K20D.

11-07-2013, 01:09 AM	#5
SyncGuy Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2011 Posts: 821	Originally posted by Miguel 300 PPI is a rather magic number that is not necessary for large prints. For the OP, I would see what Adorama's requirements are. If your image is reasonably well exposed and in focus, you should be able to go to 36-inches on the longest side. The question is do you really need to? The framing would be pricey; few people have available wall space; and super-large family portraits like that aren't often appropriate at that large size (some landscapes or still lifes certainly). I would see what size your in-laws already have and like, and if you can case out their place for wall space. Or ask your spouse. RE: metal prints, it's a matter of taste. Would it fit in to your in-laws decorating scheme? They are pretty cool in feel, some would say emotionless. I've seen good winter waterfall shots in metal. The look gets tiresome when there are a lot of them together, but that's just me. I'd consider multiple output options, the choices we have today are almost stress inducing. M Hi Miguel, Yea, noted of that as i'm just giving a rough example from what i understand how printing goes about. Could you advise on your workflow to help decide what are the appropriate settings for differing sizes?

11-07-2013, 01:27 AM	#6
jrcastillo Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Posts: 161 Original Poster	Originally posted by Miguel The framing would be pricey one thing: I am talking about the metal prints, not metallic paper. Aluminyzed Metal Prints - Online Digital Printing, Professional Aluminyzed Metal Prints - AdoramaPix As i understand, these come with a mount and no framing is required. Yes they're pricey! a 20x30 is $135 compared to sub $100 for canvas wrap around. Originally posted by dms I regularly print about 20"tx30" from my K20D. Knowing this, i think i might go for the 20x30... I will look around as they had a coupon for 30% off that barely ended Hope I can find another one

11-07-2013, 06:24 AM	#7
Joojoo2010 Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2013 Posts: 306	150ppi is just fine for large prints

11-07-2013, 11:39 AM	#8
Canada_Rockies Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Sparwood, BC, Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,385	I have printed a metallic 20x30 inch print from my K10d, and it is very good indeed, even when peered at from a foot away. I had mine done my MPix. Customer is ecstatic - what can I say?

11-07-2013, 11:46 AM	#9
jrcastillo Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Posts: 161 Original Poster	Originally posted by Canada_Rockies I had mine done my MPix i was looking in their website.. i can't find the metal prints Photo Printing, Photo Cards, Holiday Cards, Announcements, Photo Books : Mpix

11-07-2013, 12:26 PM	#10
Canada_Rockies Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Sparwood, BC, Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,385	I had mine done a couple of years ago; I wonder if they stopped doing them?

11-07-2013, 01:58 PM	#11
RGlasel Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: Saskatoon Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,228	People will look closer at a large print, out of curiosity, than a smaller, handheld size and we have the ability to switch our focus from small to large and back again, so bigger prints definitely need to be sharper than smaller ones. Inkjet printing is a process of laying down microscopic dots in 3 to 6 or more different colours close enough together that our brain merges them together. Our perception of resolution or clarity depends a lot on the amount of contrast between neighbouring regions, the reflectiveness of the paper used and the smoothness of lines. The DPI of the digital image will affect the smoothness of lines, and I can see differences between a 150 DPI image and a 240 DPI image. MacBook Pro's with a 15" Retina display have 220 DPI, the latest iPhones 326 DPI. So, without upscaling, you are limited to about 20x13 with uncropped photos from your K-30. However, software can do a good job of upscaling the size of the image so lines still look smooth. What upscaling can't do is put more detail in the picture, but realistically the RAW file probably has more detail than the printer can accurately render anyways. Bottom line, if your photo has good colour contrast and sharp lines, and the printer does a good job of rendering colour, you can have good looking prints that are larger than 20x13, but there are limits. For me the maximum is 30x20, if you want to go bigger than that, you will need to do a lot of digital editing, and your editing will be noticeable, because it will look like it came from a video game.

11-09-2013, 10:41 AM	#12
ScooterMaxi Jim Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Minnesota Posts: 1,520	While I agree generally with the post above, it is a bit murky to mix screen and print resolutions. However, I agree that on large prints you start running into a digital look if you drop below 240 dpi. Unfortunately, Adobe products are inferior at up-sizing. Products such as Picture Window Pro with Lanczos scaling (preferably 6x6 or 8x8) will perform especially well with a small amount of sharpening in a second step. How big you can go pretty much depends on the subject matter. Who wants overly sharp detail in a portrait? But for most landscapes, the combination of color depth and noise in low contrast areas makes it far more difficult to achieve a dramatic effect.

11-09-2013, 11:20 AM	#13
RGlasel Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: Saskatoon Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,228	Originally posted by ScooterMaxi Jim it is a bit murky to mix screen and print resolutions I won't argue that, I included Retina screen resolutions to make the point that just because you can't see individual dots at a lower resolution, doesn't mean a higher resolution won't look better. I definitely agree that if you upscale an image, you should apply some sharpening afterwards, because that makes the image appear to be in focus. Nothing separates professionally done large prints from the rest like sharp borders between the subject and background. As you mention, too much detail in other parts of a portrait is ugly, but that kind of selective blending/blurring often requires manual editing.

11-09-2013, 11:50 AM	#14
stillshot2 Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: Phoenix, AZ Photos: Albums Posts: 1,070	I recently shot a family portrait at iso 800 indoors with my K30, I think I even cropped it a little bit, and my client had it printed at Costco's photo center to a size of 20x30. Costco isn't the best place to print photos, but at a close viewing distance of 2 feet away the framed photo looks amazing. I also took it with the 18-55 dal kit lens. If you are taking one with the DA 50mm 1.8 at f4 (which I also have) it will be insanely sharp, especially at iso 100. I try and use the 50mm 1.8 often but it was too cramped indoors for it and it was raining outside, and since I didn't have a bounce flash at the time I had to up the iso to 800 with the kit lens. For all my semi professional needs the K30 does everything I need and is a stellar camera.