I would like your advice on a print

BrianR · 11-09-2018, 06:12 AM

Do you have any local camera shops that print? Mine has a wide format printer with several paper options. It might cost a few more bucks compared to a large online service, but the hands on in-person attention they can give might be totally worth it for you.

Have you tried cropping your photo to the aspect ratio of a 16x20in print? You will lose the nice symmetrical reflection. I'd stick with a 3:2 aspect ratio to preserve the composition- 12x18in, or 13.5x20in (not a standard paper option, but you can cut down a 16x20) or 16x24in.

Regarding the resolution, I recently saw a show of 11x14in prints made with a relatively ancient digital camera, a 3mp model from 2001. At 1ft away, the pixelation was noticeable. At about 3ft away, it stopped mattering and content overruled any little technical flaws. Resolution will not be a problem for printing your egret at the sizes you're talking about.

Good luck with your printing adventure

!

**UncleVanya** · 11-09-2018, 06:35 AM

If what you showed us was cropped and there is any more border space then a minor change to the crop to allow a perfect 4x5 ratio will work. (Divide height in pixels by 5, multiply by 4, thats the width in pixels needed. 20/4=5 16/4=4

TonyW · 11-09-2018, 06:40 AM

FWIW, I like the first crop you made for this subject and although I do not know what lies in the file outside your crop I suspect it will be similar to my mock up (hope ok to post this/). 16x20 is a traditional analogue print size but is there any reason why you must have this? Your crop sized to 20" would yield a 13.25" wide print.

As someone else pointed out I would just make sure that there was no clipping of white feather areas and I believe you will have an image to be proud of on your wall

**UncleVanya** · 11-09-2018, 06:51 AM - **1 Like**

For what it is worth if it were My print I'd keep the crop and have them mat it to fit the size of the print to the frame. The tall crop ratio adds to the elegance of the bird. The frame stays the same but the mat will simply have wider borders. You would use a 20x24 frame or similar and mat to fit. The sides would have wider borders doing it this way, but it would look great either way.

If you are matting you'll need to leave an overlap border on the print so your mat has a place to attach.

photolady95 · 11-09-2018, 08:48 AM

Print size, I don't think in inches per se, because I work in pixels. Because that's what the camera works in, my editing software is PSE as mentioned before in the other thread, I have it set to pixels not inches. And the software has an option to see print size, though I didn't check that to see what it would tell me, I wanted to ask you guys first cause I figured you would know more than PSE would.

And I'm not going to be doing any printing right away as it is, I've some business to take care of first that's been dragging out and probably will for the next month.

**Just1MoreDave** · 11-09-2018, 11:06 AM

I have used mpix for maybe six prints at 24x36, from either a K-7 or K-5 IIs. The resolution was fine. I wouldn't worry about that at all. The print costs aren't bad but larger (good) frames and glass can add up quickly. If I like the shot, I want it big. Then it's just a question of the right aspect ratio to crop, and finding a frame in that ratio.

A couple of my large prints were at dusk or night, with dark backgrounds but still details in the dark areas. I made them look great on a good screen and sent them off. The prints were too dark in those background areas. I reprocessed them by brightening the shadows quite a lot, which looks like a mistake on a screen. The reprint worked out perfectly. The dynamic range of modern sensors is much bigger than the print can show, so you have to give the printer a file that works. In Lightroom or full Photoshop, there is a Shadows slider which works well for me. I know Elements didn't use to have that slider but maybe it's there in recent versions. The slider is just an easy shortcut, you can get the same results in other ways.

photolady95 · 11-09-2018, 05:36 PM

Brian, we don't even have any local camera shops, much less any that print. We're a smallish town, that barely has anything, not even a Micky Ds. LOL

But everything is on hold for now. Though I don't like the 13.25 one, too skinny, doesn't show as much of the area as I wanted to show. I wanted the bird to stand out against his/her background and the reflection.

Breakfastographer · 11-21-2018, 03:57 AM

Originally posted by TonyW

FWIW, I like the first crop you made for this subject and although I do not know what lies in the file outside your crop I suspect it will be similar to my mock up (hope ok to post this/). 16x20 is a traditional analogue print size but is there any reason why you must have this? Your crop sized to 20" would yield a 13.25" wide print.

As someone else pointed out I would just make sure that there was no clipping of white feather areas and I believe you will have an image to be proud of on your wall

I think there's a general consensus to keep the original aspect ratio, but if the decision were in favour of a wider image, I would suggest more lead room rather than central placement of the subject. Note I'm not saying it should be wider, just IF.

photolady95 · 11-21-2018, 04:06 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Breakfastographer

I would suggest more lead room rather than central placement of the subject.

I never liked subjects dead center in a photo. So, I'll agree with that.

When I get ready to print, I'll let you all know what I decided on and supply a finished photo of the overall framed and matted photo.

TonyW · 11-21-2018, 04:11 AM

Originally posted by Breakfastographer

I think there's a general consensus to keep the original aspect ratio, but if the decision were in favour of a wider image, I would suggest more lead room rather than central placement of the subject. Note I'm not saying it should be wider, just IF.

I agree but as the "skinny" image is not to OP's taste I guess it does not really matter but for the 20"x16" your suggestion of less than central placement I for one like

photolady95 · 11-21-2018, 04:14 AM

Usually, when I crop, I leave plenty of room in front of the beak, and not much room behind but for this photo, I thought the added details behind (the tree roots) were as important as the parts in front of the beak.

TonyW · 11-21-2018, 05:46 AM

There is only one correct way and that is exactly what you find visually appealing and satisfies your aesthetic.

You know what you like and exactly where and how you are going to light and display your capture.

We may all pass opinion and offer suggestions but you and only you as the artist will make the final decision. I do not shoot birds but to me that is a fine capture and deserves to be printed and mounted for yours and others enjoyment.

photolady95 · 11-21-2018, 06:32 AM

Originally posted by TonyW

There is only one correct way and that is exactly what you find visually appealing and satisfies your aesthetic.

You know what you like and exactly where and how you are going to light and display your capture.

We may all pass opinion and offer suggestions but you and only you as the artist will make the final decision. I do not shoot birds but to me that is a fine capture and deserves to be printed and mounted for yours and others enjoyment.

Thank you for seeing that! And for the compliment!

**UncleVanya** · 11-21-2018, 02:19 PM - **1 Like**

I do want to point out that the photo as presented doesn't have the ratio needed for the size of the print that @photolady95 has indicated wanting to print. There was no intention on anyone's part to change the photo - but to point out that the photo as cropped and presented can't be printed without modification unless it is printed at a different size than 16x20. 13x20 (or whatever specific actual dimensions will be) is more representative of what was presented than 16x20 would be. Essentially we all were influenced to suggest modified dimensions with the expectation that the photo was already cropped to the format and ratio that was pleasing to the person posting it.

photolady95 · 11-21-2018, 03:26 PM

I want to point out that the size I gave to start with was given to me, in my PYP upload. When I asked here, it was for you all to give me the size that it would look the best for that shot. But, I'll still say I don't like the skinnier one. If you can come up with a wider one, I'll take it into consideration.

11-09-2018, 06:12 AM	#46
BrianR Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Ontario Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,332	Do you have any local camera shops that print? Mine has a wide format printer with several paper options. It might cost a few more bucks compared to a large online service, but the hands on in-person attention they can give might be totally worth it for you. Have you tried cropping your photo to the aspect ratio of a 16x20in print? You will lose the nice symmetrical reflection. I'd stick with a 3:2 aspect ratio to preserve the composition- 12x18in, or 13.5x20in (not a standard paper option, but you can cut down a 16x20) or 16x24in. Regarding the resolution, I recently saw a show of 11x14in prints made with a relatively ancient digital camera, a 3mp model from 2001. At 1ft away, the pixelation was noticeable. At about 3ft away, it stopped mattering and content overruled any little technical flaws. Resolution will not be a problem for printing your egret at the sizes you're talking about. Good luck with your printing adventure!

11-09-2018, 08:48 AM	#50
photolady95 Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: May 2009 Location: Cruising the forum watching his back Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,712 Original Poster	Print size, I don't think in inches per se, because I work in pixels. Because that's what the camera works in, my editing software is PSE as mentioned before in the other thread, I have it set to pixels not inches. And the software has an option to see print size, though I didn't check that to see what it would tell me, I wanted to ask you guys first cause I figured you would know more than PSE would. And I'm not going to be doing any printing right away as it is, I've some business to take care of first that's been dragging out and probably will for the next month. Last edited by photolady95; 11-09-2018 at 09:08 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Abstract One thing on which I would like opinion/advice.	gump	Photo Critique	14	05-31-2018 01:00 PM
Would like advice on FA28 vs. FA35	Anthen	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	23	02-12-2015 10:38 AM
I am going to travel to U.S.A (to work) in winter and i would like your advice	carlosodze	General Talk	13	06-15-2014 07:19 AM
Traditional print vs scan & print	rodneysan	Pentax Medium Format	8	05-06-2010 03:33 PM
Would like some advice.	newKid10D	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	7	02-10-2009 11:28 PM

11-09-2018, 06:35 AM	#47
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,384	If what you showed us was cropped and there is any more border space then a minor change to the crop to allow a perfect 4x5 ratio will work. (Divide height in pixels by 5, multiply by 4, thats the width in pixels needed. 20/4=5 16/4=4

11-09-2018, 06:40 AM	#48
TonyW Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2016 Posts: 706	FWIW, I like the first crop you made for this subject and although I do not know what lies in the file outside your crop I suspect it will be similar to my mock up (hope ok to post this/). 16x20 is a traditional analogue print size but is there any reason why you must have this? Your crop sized to 20" would yield a 13.25" wide print. As someone else pointed out I would just make sure that there was no clipping of white feather areas and I believe you will have an image to be proud of on your wall

11-09-2018, 06:51 AM - 1 Like	#49
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,384	For what it is worth if it were My print I'd keep the crop and have them mat it to fit the size of the print to the frame. The tall crop ratio adds to the elegance of the bird. The frame stays the same but the mat will simply have wider borders. You would use a 20x24 frame or similar and mat to fit. The sides would have wider borders doing it this way, but it would look great either way. If you are matting you'll need to leave an overlap border on the print so your mat has a place to attach.

11-09-2018, 11:06 AM	#51
Just1MoreDave Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Aurora, CO Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,339	I have used mpix for maybe six prints at 24x36, from either a K-7 or K-5 IIs. The resolution was fine. I wouldn't worry about that at all. The print costs aren't bad but larger (good) frames and glass can add up quickly. If I like the shot, I want it big. Then it's just a question of the right aspect ratio to crop, and finding a frame in that ratio. A couple of my large prints were at dusk or night, with dark backgrounds but still details in the dark areas. I made them look great on a good screen and sent them off. The prints were too dark in those background areas. I reprocessed them by brightening the shadows quite a lot, which looks like a mistake on a screen. The reprint worked out perfectly. The dynamic range of modern sensors is much bigger than the print can show, so you have to give the printer a file that works. In Lightroom or full Photoshop, there is a Shadows slider which works well for me. I know Elements didn't use to have that slider but maybe it's there in recent versions. The slider is just an easy shortcut, you can get the same results in other ways.

11-09-2018, 05:36 PM	#52
photolady95 Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: May 2009 Location: Cruising the forum watching his back Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,712 Original Poster	Brian, we don't even have any local camera shops, much less any that print. We're a smallish town, that barely has anything, not even a Micky Ds. LOL But everything is on hold for now. Though I don't like the 13.25 one, too skinny, doesn't show as much of the area as I wanted to show. I wanted the bird to stand out against his/her background and the reflection.

11-21-2018, 03:57 AM	#53
Breakfastographer Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2018 Posts: 673	Originally posted by TonyW FWIW, I like the first crop you made for this subject and although I do not know what lies in the file outside your crop I suspect it will be similar to my mock up (hope ok to post this/). 16x20 is a traditional analogue print size but is there any reason why you must have this? Your crop sized to 20" would yield a 13.25" wide print. As someone else pointed out I would just make sure that there was no clipping of white feather areas and I believe you will have an image to be proud of on your wall I think there's a general consensus to keep the original aspect ratio, but if the decision were in favour of a wider image, I would suggest more lead room rather than central placement of the subject. Note I'm not saying it should be wider, just IF.

11-21-2018, 04:06 AM - 1 Like	#54
photolady95 Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: May 2009 Location: Cruising the forum watching his back Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,712 Original Poster	Originally posted by Breakfastographer I would suggest more lead room rather than central placement of the subject. I never liked subjects dead center in a photo. So, I'll agree with that. When I get ready to print, I'll let you all know what I decided on and supply a finished photo of the overall framed and matted photo.

11-21-2018, 04:11 AM	#55
TonyW Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2016 Posts: 706	Originally posted by Breakfastographer I think there's a general consensus to keep the original aspect ratio, but if the decision were in favour of a wider image, I would suggest more lead room rather than central placement of the subject. Note I'm not saying it should be wider, just IF. I agree but as the "skinny" image is not to OP's taste I guess it does not really matter but for the 20"x16" your suggestion of less than central placement I for one like

11-21-2018, 04:14 AM	#56
photolady95 Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: May 2009 Location: Cruising the forum watching his back Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,712 Original Poster	Usually, when I crop, I leave plenty of room in front of the beak, and not much room behind but for this photo, I thought the added details behind (the tree roots) were as important as the parts in front of the beak.

11-21-2018, 05:46 AM	#57
TonyW Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2016 Posts: 706	There is only one correct way and that is exactly what you find visually appealing and satisfies your aesthetic. You know what you like and exactly where and how you are going to light and display your capture. We may all pass opinion and offer suggestions but you and only you as the artist will make the final decision. I do not shoot birds but to me that is a fine capture and deserves to be printed and mounted for yours and others enjoyment.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

11-21-2018, 06:32 AM	#58
photolady95 Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: May 2009 Location: Cruising the forum watching his back Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,712 Original Poster	Originally posted by TonyW There is only one correct way and that is exactly what you find visually appealing and satisfies your aesthetic. You know what you like and exactly where and how you are going to light and display your capture. We may all pass opinion and offer suggestions but you and only you as the artist will make the final decision. I do not shoot birds but to me that is a fine capture and deserves to be printed and mounted for yours and others enjoyment. Thank you for seeing that! And for the compliment!

11-21-2018, 02:19 PM - 1 Like	#59
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,384	I do want to point out that the photo as presented doesn't have the ratio needed for the size of the print that @photolady95 has indicated wanting to print. There was no intention on anyone's part to change the photo - but to point out that the photo as cropped and presented can't be printed without modification unless it is printed at a different size than 16x20. 13x20 (or whatever specific actual dimensions will be) is more representative of what was presented than 16x20 would be. Essentially we all were influenced to suggest modified dimensions with the expectation that the photo was already cropped to the format and ratio that was pleasing to the person posting it.

11-21-2018, 03:26 PM	#60
photolady95 Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: May 2009 Location: Cruising the forum watching his back Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,712 Original Poster	I want to point out that the size I gave to start with was given to me, in my PYP upload. When I asked here, it was for you all to give me the size that it would look the best for that shot. But, I'll still say I don't like the skinnier one. If you can come up with a wider one, I'll take it into consideration.