Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-15-2013, 07:26 AM   #1
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Douglas_of_Sweden's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Stockholm
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,374
Ideal distance to view printed photographs?

I'm always been told not to hang too large photos unless you are able to step back and view it from a suitable distance. But is there a more concrete rule for this. A way to calculate the suitable viewing distance from the size of the printed images? Or wise verse, given a maximum viewing distance, what is the larges size one should hang there? Links would be great, or reference to some book.

This has come up at work where they want to hang 100x70cm prints in a rather narrow corridor. We have had posters there from scientific conferences, but while they are of a comparable size, they always consists of multiple smaller images, diagrams and text-boxes, so you actually have to stand rather close to them to view them (read them). Now I'm afraid that one wont be able to apprechiate the images completely even with the back pressed against the opposite wall...

10-15-2013, 07:34 AM   #2
Veteran Member
Na Horuk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Slovenia, probably
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,186
I think it depends on the resolution. A high-resolution poster can be viewed up close. But if the resolution is not that high, a close up examination will reveal a lack of detail and blockyness.
If you have the resolution, it depends on your "artistic" vision. You can make a large high resolution print to make the viewer feel immersed. Or you can make a small print that will impact the viewer from across the room, like a window into another world. So, ask for the resolution of the image and the printer (one of them will limit the other)

But I think there is a general rule, which has to do with diagonals. You need to be a certain number of diagonal lengths of the print away from it. If you do that, even a relatively low print resolution will look okay, and the photo will look generally like the artist intended. I forget the exact formula, but Im sure someone will mention it.

Hm, though, with modern cameras and print methods, its pretty amazing how good even low-res photos can look up close. And the other thing is that most viewers will skim over the photo, they wont look up close and search for mistakes and faults. Viewers who are not photographers tend to focus on the content more than the medium itself.
10-15-2013, 07:49 AM   #3
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Douglas_of_Sweden's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Stockholm
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,374
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Na Horuk Quote
But I think there is a general rule, which has to do with diagonals. You need to be a certain number of diagonal lengths of the print away from it. If you do that, even a relatively low print resolution will look okay, and the photo will look generally like the artist intended. I forget the exact formula, but Im sure someone will mention it.
It is something like that I am looking for.
About resolution...there must be some limit there too. If you are too close, even if you still see details, you only see details in part of the picture, and miss out the whole picture. A bit like not seeing the forest for the trees...
10-15-2013, 07:56 AM   #4
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Miguel's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Near Seattle
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,743
Speak with a curator at a local museum or gallery. They deal with these issues all the time.

M

10-15-2013, 08:36 AM   #5
Pentaxian
SpecialK's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: So California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 16,479
QuoteOriginally posted by Douglas_of_Sweden Quote
But is there a more concrete rule for this. A way to calculate the suitable viewing distance from the size of the printed images?
In film days it was focal length x degree of enlargement. The crop factor may make it x 1.5 these days.
10-15-2013, 10:01 AM   #6
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 42,007
Viewing distance?

Eh, there's the rub. So much depends on viewing distance. By convention, it is based on the FOV, sensor size, and final image size. Here is a link to a phone app (both iPhone and Android, courtesy of Argonne National Lab) that will do the calculation for you.

PVDcalc: A Free Utility for Calculating Correct Photograph Viewing Distances


For some perspective on the issue, simply Google "viewing distance for photograph" to read the varied opinions on the subject.


Steve
10-15-2013, 10:56 AM   #7
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,442
So if I take an image of a small bird on my porch with my 400mm lens and display it on a screen with a width of 14 inches, the correct viewing distance is 21 feet? I think the concept needs a little work.

10-15-2013, 10:59 AM   #8
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 42,007
...or just take 1.5x the length of the print diagonal...


Steve

...many thanks to NorthLight Images... Resolution for print viewing distance
10-15-2013, 11:08 AM   #9
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Douglas_of_Sweden's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Stockholm
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,374
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by SpecialK Quote
In film days it was focal length x degree of enlargement. The crop factor may make it x 1.5 these days.
I don't get this. The degree of enlargement should be the print size divided by the sensor size...so isn't the crop factor already taken into account in the degree of enlargement?
10-15-2013, 11:22 AM   #10
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,442
QuoteOriginally posted by stevebrot Quote
...or just take 1.5x the length of the print diagonal...


Steve

...many thanks to NorthLight Images... Resolution for print viewing distance
That sounds like it could work... in that it's based on the distance at which the eye can cover both ends of the print as, opposed to something more obscure.
10-15-2013, 11:32 AM   #11
Pentaxian
SpecialK's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: So California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 16,479
QuoteOriginally posted by Douglas_of_Sweden Quote
I don't get this. The degree of enlargement should be the print size divided by the sensor size...so isn't the crop factor already taken into account in the degree of enlargement?
I think you are right. Focal length x degree of enlargement is the formula for the correct perspective. It sounds logical and right.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
distance, images, photo industry, photography, size, view
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Macro From view to view eaglem Post Your Photos! 10 08-02-2012 07:17 AM
Landscape Panorama to be printed at Staples charliezap Post Your Photos! 14 08-16-2011 07:35 AM
Poll for ideal lens-subject distance FHPhotographer Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 35 10-14-2008 03:05 PM
Photographs from trip to Ardennes (Belgium) and Cologne (Germany) (13 photographs) barendvl Post Your Photos! 2 07-30-2007 03:15 PM
distance in view finder regken Pentax DSLR Discussion 4 04-18-2007 06:53 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:49 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top