|
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing
04-30-2019, 05:09 AM
|
| |
Thanks Tony, every time we go through this it gets clear and clearer. And thanks for the comment on buildings etc. We don't have many buildings where I lives so not surprisingly, I just don't think fo them as frequent subject matter, where as I'm guessing for the majority of the planet who live in extensive population centres they are more of a thing.
|
|
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing
04-29-2019, 03:06 PM
|
| |
I'd also say there will be some images that will absolutely use every bit of printer resolution possible, but my expectation would be they are pretty rare, and that the client who would want them would be equally rare.
But based on my experience with my Pixma 1000 Pro, the time taken to print the image increased with the resolution.
|
|
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing
04-29-2019, 11:57 AM
|
| |
In film days 100 lw/ph was considered acceptable for large prints. I'm not going to re-invent the wheel.
Upsampling to make best use of the printer is a no brainer.
The difficulty of finding printers who can print 600 or 700 dpi makes it pretty much a moot point, you're probably going to be printing at 300 or 360 DPI. Upsample accordingly.
Even if you could find a printer who can print 600-700 DPI, how much more expensive would it be? If you're selling your images double the price to you exponentially increase the price to the customer. Can you really make money doing that. If it's for yourself, is it worth taking on the additional costs?
These are of course not technical considerations. But, I hate technical information presented in a vacuum, as if that's all you have to think about.
Just a few observations from previous conversations.
|
|
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing
04-29-2019, 10:22 AM
|
| |
When Apple cancelled idisk I lost many image files. I found one I liked somewhere and printed it, even though I could only print 72 DPI. As a 4x6 it looked fine, as good as most of my film images. A lot depends on the image and what you want it for. And as I always say, sometimes the lower res image looks better. I try and stay over 100 lw/ph, and that was a standard since forever. It's much better standard than DPI. So a K-3 at 2700 lw/ph should be good to 27 inches. A K-1 should be good to 34 incase. That's probably more detail than you're likely to see. If you're setting up a clinic to sell hi res printing equipment and cameras, I'm sure you can make case for higher resolution. I'm also pretty sure you're going to be selecting your images to make your point and discarding the images that wouldn't help.
Images like this (similar images have sold for over $1million, when a big name photographer was selling it) need good enlargement software, resolution is optional, resolution isn't what it's about.
 Monet-inspired - print by Norm Head, on Flickr
|
|
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing
04-03-2019, 09:16 AM
|
| |
The fact that a picture might look better by some measures printed between 200-300 DPI, which is entirely debatable, doesn't mean if you have an image with a real 150 Dpi you won't enjoy it. I always figure, print what you have at the size you like. Be adventurous. It might be wasted money, but I have some great prints that have been hanging on our walls for years, that my current printer would send me a notice for, stating that they might not be acceptable. Which is really funny when we are reprinting it because we sold the original.
(125 real DPI is my bottom limit. (A 6000x400 K-3 image is approx. 27000 lw/ph, 3000 before compete extinction, so 125 DPI is actually about 63 lines per inch.)
|
|
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing
04-01-2019, 07:14 AM
|
| |
And there are times when the more expensive camera is a detriment to actually taking the picture. You can't match the point and shoot, because you'd have to set up tripod, and sometimes there isn't even place to set up tripod, and shoot a long exposure, impossible when there is motion in the scene, to get the same result. Cheap cameras can do amazing things these days.
|
|
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing
04-01-2019, 06:23 AM
|
| |
The difference being that, you can't enjoy the composition of a photograph at 10 ", so it comes down to what do you enjoy in a phototogrpah, composition, or technical clarity from 10". Clarity from 10" brings me no joy at all.
Because we printed a lot of 30x20 (inches) on canvas, our best selling print was barely 100 DPI taken with point and shoot. Of course we blew it up to 300 DPI for the printer. But still the true value in terms of resolution was 100 DPI.
My observation over the years is that people who don't actually do prints, grossly underestimate how good a 100 DPI image can be even printed to 30x20.
Not only that, my wife image taken with an Opito 10 12 MP was better than side by side images taken with my K-5.
The end result of all these recommendations for high DPIs in printing is there are a lot of people who have images that would be great prints hanging on their wall, if they could ignore the internet nonsense, get over the preposterous suggested DPI limits and just print.
The printing community is doing itself a great disservice, although I've notice many have lowered their standards based on actual data from what their customers are actually happy with, as opposed to what the camera companies and printer companies would have you believe. The camera companies don't want you selling 12 MP point and shoot images. They want their cut of your photographic income. The printer companies are just shooting themselves in the feet. And people adopting standards like 200-300 DPI for acceptable printing are simply propagandists.
My advice would be as long as you have a real 100 DPI or over, upscale for the printer used (360 DPI or 300 DPI) print away. If the composition is good, you'll enjoy the print.
I don't care personally if I can see difference. No one ever compares two of the same images at different DPIs in the real world. Unless the difference diminishes my enjoyment of the composition it's moot.
I know the printers want it to be all about the technical ins and outs of the printing, but it's not. It's about composition. The printing just has to be good enough to view from your lap, for a book, maybe 20" or 3 feet if it's hanging on a wall.
I have prints done at 72 DPI that I thoroughly enjoy.
I have never once heard a person say, "That's a great composition but I couldn't enjoy it because the native DPI wasn't high enough."
But I know of many images taken by friends who didn't print their favourite images because a computer analysis on some printing site told them there print was only going to be "good" not "excellent" and then assumed that they could only possibly happy with "excellent." The attitudes of the print community is costing them money.
You can listen to the printers if you want, but they'll just poop on your parade for no good reason. They are way too critical, because in their minds, the technical aspects of printing are important as they should be. But they give really bad advice when it comes to what people will like hanging on their wall, people not including people who want their prints to look as sharp as possible from 10 inches away, which as far as I can tell is hardly anyone.
There's a difference between, "it looks sharper", and "it's more pleasing to look at." And too much detail can actually ruin an image as much as not enough detail can. Resolution must be appropriate to the subject.
This is the opinion of a guy who made money not listening to what printers told him he should be printing. In fact when I found out what printers were recommending, I was completely shocked. By the time I found out what was recommended, I'd already sold over 20 "low res" images.
Needless to say, these days I just print good compositions, you'll never convince me I need more MP for certain size for any image. I'll print whatever image I have to the size the customer wants. I have k-3 file slightly cropped printed on posterboard at 48'x 30 inches. That's 125 DPI. I've already had some interest shown in the print (just from friends who visit me at home) but so far no one likes the price.
So my question would be who are these people who recommend 200-300 Dpi talking to, what's the target market?
|
