Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-03-2014, 02:58 PM   #16
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,556
QuoteOriginally posted by Heie Quote
That's a 30x45 inch (76x114 cm) print, aka A ZERO.

And let me tell you - it looks abso-f'ing-lutely incredible!! At this size, it's approximately 133 dpi. Even from close up inspection, you can still make out the windows and which ones have blinds up/down. Unbelievable.

I am now, if I wasn't before, 100% a believer in the power of the K-3. Just.....wow....

Anyway, wanted to share that with you all.

-Heie
I don't want to be a party pooper, but I made bigger prints from the K-01 and they look fine.

I made a similar size print on photokina at the stand of Epson from K-3 and looks great. The guy from Epson said that printing double that size wouldn't be any problem. Going to 44"x66" in print (112x168cm).

Great image Heie

10-04-2014, 04:41 AM   #17
Pentaxian




Join Date: Dec 2013
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 501
What print size would correspond to a 100% zoom on a 2560 * 1440 monitor, if such a question is appropriate from a techical point of view. I do not know anything about printing.
10-04-2014, 05:34 AM   #18
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,556
QuoteOriginally posted by Stagnant Quote
What print size would correspond to a 100% zoom on a 2560 * 1440 monitor, if such a question is appropriate from a techical point of view. I do not know anything about printing.
Well if you are talking about a 27 inch screen that has a form of 59,7 x 33,7cm.
10-04-2014, 05:39 AM   #19
Pentaxian




Join Date: Dec 2013
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 501
QuoteOriginally posted by RonHendriks1966 Quote
Well if you are talking about a 27 inch screen that has a form of 59,7 x 33,7cm.
I am talking about that very screen.

10-04-2014, 05:55 AM   #20
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,767
Thanks for sharing... it's always good to see what be done with what you have...
It makes you wonder though... all these guys saying, you need extra resolution of a larger format for large prints. Well honestly, how large is large? They never say. And also never admit, they don't know.

That old song "They said it couldn't be done" comes to mind. Somehow the voices of those who just go out and do it get drowned out in the negativity of the internet experts.
My advice, having sold many images printed as low as 120 dpi... print your picture at the size you want to see it. You probably will never print an image you aren't happy with using a camera 12 MP and above. Just think about it, if you could paint 133 separate brush stokes in an inch on a canvas, how fine that would be. 13 stokes in 1/10 of an inch. Brush strokes less than .01 inches wide. There are experts out there, telling you, that's not enough detail...

---------- Post added 10-04-14 at 09:03 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by RonHendriks1966 Quote
I don't want to be a party pooper, but I made bigger prints from the K-01 and they look fine.

I made a similar size print on photokina at the stand of Epson from K-3 and looks great. The guy from Epson said that printing double that size wouldn't be any problem. Going to 44"x66" in print (112x168cm).

Great image Heie
We should really start a "How big have you printed thread", I've printed as big as 30x20 inches, but, you guys are making me want to go bigger.
10-04-2014, 06:15 AM   #21
Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 26,212
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
Just think about it, if you could paint 133 separate brush stokes in an inch on a canvas, how fine that would be.
I guess that is why we are always told to step away from a painting.


Steve
10-04-2014, 06:49 AM   #22
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southern Indiana
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,954
QuoteOriginally posted by stevebrot Quote
I guess that is why we are always told to step away from a painting.


Steve
"I couldn't see the painting for the brush strokes?" or, "I couldn't see the photo for the pixels."
10-04-2014, 07:02 AM   #23
Pentaxian




Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Ontario
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,285
Nice print and wall colour also

QuoteOriginally posted by Stagnant Quote
I am talking about that very screen.
Your screen is 2560 pixels across, an image from a k-3 is 6000 pixels across the long side. So at 100% view, the image is 6000/2560=2.34375 times larger than your screen, so a corresponding print would be 2.34375 * 60cm=140.65cm across. So it would be about 141 cm by 94 cm or 55 inches by 37 inches.

10-04-2014, 07:36 AM   #24
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,556
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
We should really start a "How big have you printed thread", I've printed as big as 30x20 inches, but, you guys are making me want to go bigger.
my largest print is 59 inch and half that size in width. So 150x75cm from K-01.
10-04-2014, 07:43 AM   #25
Pentaxian
bossa's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 4,538
QuoteOriginally posted by PT1 Quote
In Lightroom you can export with a different resolution. If you export as 12032 X and 8000 Y, it interpolates between each pixel, and quadruples the resolution to 96 Mpixels, giving an approx 34MB JPEG at 100% quality level. The reduction in blockiness when pixel peeping is very noticeable.

Here's a downloadable full-size approx 96 Mpixel 34MB exported 12032x8000 JPG: https://www.amazon.co.uk/clouddrive/share/oZkLZBEwVJ6vNlJHmFBr9OhTi-pcQexSTMsAq42rVdE

12032 pixels = 40.1 inches wide at 300 dpi.

I've tried exporting to TIFF instead of JPG, but by eye there wasn't a great difference, only in the huge file size.


Unsurprisingly, trying to use Lightroom to quadruple the X to 24064 and the Y to 16000 didn't look good, at least when trying to do so in one step.

But exporting with double X and double Y, then importing this JPG, then exporting again with double X and double Y a second time gives a reasonable result.

Here's a downloadable full-size approx 370 Mpixel 100MB exported 24064x16000 JPG: https://www.amazon.co.uk/clouddrive/share/49F44o9dq5j_jhj1lX3QEHkXsmAIqf_yogBKn5qZ7P8

Shown below is a 'pixel peep' screenshot of the 96MP and 370MP jpg's. I didn't keep the original 24MP from the k-3, so I exported the 96 MP as 24 MP to show how blocky it looks.

Whether the 96MP looks softer overall due to blurred colour transitions than the original 24MP might be a possibility. It is probably better to export to uncompressed dng instead of jpg.

The 370 Mpixel jpg is probably unnecessarily fine

Obviously the more you zoom in, the more the noise is noticeable.
Are you referring to the LR Print Module? The "export" menu is another thing altogether.
10-04-2014, 07:55 AM   #26
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Hoevelaken
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 817
QuoteOriginally posted by RonHendriks1966 Quote
my largest print is 59 inch and half that size in width. So 150x75cm from K-01.
yes, your yellow beauty is nice, but i rather have my k3 for printing
10-05-2014, 05:19 AM   #27
PT1
Forum Member




Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Somerset, UK
Posts: 54
Export (Shift Ctrl E) in Lightroom 5.6 is what I've used, while in Library or Develop...
Attached Images
 
10-05-2014, 09:43 AM   #28
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,767
QuoteOriginally posted by stevebrot Quote
I guess that is why we are always told to step away from a painting.


Steve
Unlike a painting, when you scale an image upwards there are no brush strokes, and unlike film, you are not enlarging grain, .... in fact if you ever saw my TC thread on whether or not the Pentax 1.4 TC or 1.7 tc degrade images, you'd know that a decent PP program will actually clean up your images with their anti-aliasing algorithms to the point that digital is completely different than film. You had to know where to look to see the added detail of the longer lenses images. Looking at basic lines and shapes, they looked worse. Your images can actually look cleaner scaled up, than they would printed at 300dpi native. I'm amazed at how many people who profess to be "knowledgeable" haven't noticed things like this, and make comments like the above.

Unless of course we were digressing into looking at paintings, and not discussing photography at all anymore... that could happen with..
10-05-2014, 09:56 AM   #29
Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 26,212
QuoteOriginally posted by PT1 Quote
Export (Shift Ctrl E) in Lightroom 5.6 is what I've used, while in Library or Develop...
Yes, Lightroom will apply an upsample on export and can also do it when printing. The quality of that upsample may or may not be adequate since it is sort of a "one size fits all" solution.


Steve

---------- Post added 10-05-14 at 10:00 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
Unlike a painting, when you scale an image upwards there are no brush strokes, and unlike film, you are not enlarging grain
Absolutely true, with an upsample you are filling in the blanks with the software's best estimate of what should be there. In other words the RIP is making up data with the hope that nobody will notice. The result is visually smooth (no strokes or grain), but the image is false.*


Steve

* A good example of this is a digital image of a high contrast test target. At the narrowest line-pair sets the processed camera image will show a nice straight line where none exists in the original. Similarly, clean-up algorithms often create detail beyond what was available to the sensor.

Last edited by stevebrot; 10-05-2014 at 10:05 AM.
10-05-2014, 10:15 AM   #30
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,556
QuoteOriginally posted by PT1 Quote
Export (Shift Ctrl E) in Lightroom 5.6 is what I've used, while in Library or Develop...
I think it's better to put the sharpening at Paper glossy and in the middle (so not strong).
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!
dslr, epson, experts, export, grain, guys, image, inch, inches, jenny, k-3, k3, lightroom, offer, pentax k-3, print, prints, share, size, steve, strokes, zenfolio
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Print quality from K-3 TaiChiTom Pentax K-3 9 11-15-2013 03:58 AM
K-3 Build Quality BlakeShellman Pentax K-3 35 11-10-2013 05:54 AM
Pentax k-3 audio recording quality vjacesslav Pentax K-3 4 11-03-2013 06:12 PM
16x22 Print Quality bethtphotos Pentax DSLR Discussion 30 12-31-2008 07:53 AM
Print Quality montezuma Pentax Film SLR Discussion 2 06-20-2008 11:49 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:19 PM. | See also: NikonForums.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