Print size question
Jun 5, 2023 12:29:23 #
I need some clarification: My understanding is that if you take the pixels dimensions, and divide by 300 that will give you the size that you can safely expect to be able to print. i.e. for example, if the size is 6000X4000, then you can print it 20"X13.3". Keeping that same ratio, can you print it larger? Say 60X39.9(or 40 for round numbers). Thinking primarily about landscape pano's.
Jun 5, 2023 12:49:58 #
steve_stoneblossom
Loc: Rhode Island, USA
The premise is that dividing the image dimensions by 300 gives you the approximate largest size for a good quality print. You can print larger, but quality will decrease. But 3 times larger? Perhaps, if the original image is a very high quality image. I guess a lot depends on what you feel is acceptable quality.
Full disclosure, I have limited printing experience.
Full disclosure, I have limited printing experience.
Jun 5, 2023 12:55:59 #
If pixelation was going to be a problem you could use upsizing software. The only thing that you'd be missing when compared to starting with a higher resolution photo is microdetail - which you'll miss only if you see a side-by-side comparison.
Jun 5, 2023 12:59:27 #
To some degree, it is a matter of preference. I think of it this way. My monitor is about 14 inches wide. The display resolution is 1280 X 1024. So there are 1280/14 pixels/inch ~ 91 p/i. Would you be happy with that as a print? Granted, not all pixels of my photos are displayed on my monitor unless I blow it up. But you can crop a photo to get around 1280 pixels wide and display it and see. None-the-less, you get the idea.
Jun 5, 2023 13:00:19 #
Elmo55 wrote:
I need some clarification: My understanding is that if you take the pixels dimensions, and divide by 300 that will give you the size that you can safely expect to be able to print. i.e. for example, if the size is 6000X4000, then you can print it 20"X13.3". Keeping that same ratio, can you print it larger? Say 60X39.9(or 40 for round numbers). Thinking primarily about landscape pano's.
300 PPI is not some magic number that dictates print size. A lot depends on viewing distance and the subject matter of the image. Some considerations of the reproduction medium are important, too. Glossy paper printed on a high resolution inkjet printer needs more pixels of original image than a large monitor.
300 PPI is about right for most 5x7 inch prints viewed from 8 inches. 240 PPI is about right for most 8x10 inch prints viewed from 12.2 inches. But if you're pixel peeping it to see fine details, you need 300 PPI.
I encourage you to make tests to determine what works for you. I've made 60 inch by 40 inch prints from 3000x2000 pixel images, but they were head-and-shoulders portraits designed to be viewed from at least eight feet away. At that distance, they looked perfectly fine. But a 60x40 landscape should probably contain many times that many pixels!
The answer, as in all of photography and life, is, "It depends!"
Jun 5, 2023 13:01:03 #
petercbrandt
Loc: New York City, Manhattan
Elmo55 wrote:
I need some clarification: My understanding is that if you take the pixels dimensions, and divide by 300 that will give you the size that you can safely expect to be able to print. i.e. for example, if the size is 6000X4000, then you can print it 20"X13.3". Keeping that same ratio, can you print it larger? Say 60X39.9(or 40 for round numbers). Thinking primarily about landscape pano's.
xxxxxxxxx
You can use most photo manipulation programs to up the pixels. My old 2008 Photoshop CS4 does it, and as a precaution I up the pixels by 15% each step, even 10% each time helps keep the sharp focus.
When, in 2006, I bought my first pro digital 35mm camera (Fujifilm S2 Pro....6mpx) we made a 40x60" print for the lobby of an office building for my clients architect, Beyer Blinder Belle. Dugall Labs in Manhattan handled the 'interpilation" in their computer. Looked so great I took a photo of the lobby with my photo in the background.
Jun 5, 2023 13:18:44 #
Elmo55 wrote:
I need some clarification: My understanding is that if you take the pixels dimensions, and divide by 300 that will give you the size that you can safely expect to be able to print. i.e. for example, if the size is 6000X4000, then you can print it 20"X13.3". Keeping that same ratio, can you print it larger? Say 60X39.9(or 40 for round numbers). Thinking primarily about landscape pano's.
300 PPI is a guideline and generally for something around an 8x10. That’s generally what a glossy magazine uses. Even then you can get a good print at 240 PPI. And as prints get bigger and the normal viewing distance gets greater the resolution requirements lessen. Billboards are usually printed at 10-30 PPI.
Jun 5, 2023 13:26:41 #
Elmo55 wrote:
obviously viewing distance matters. You would not print a billboard at 300 dpi. I need some clarification: My understanding is that if you take the pixels dimensions, and divide by 300 that will give you the size that you can safely expect to be able to print. i.e. for example, if the size is 6000X4000, then you can print it 20"X13.3". Keeping that same ratio, can you print it larger? Say 60X39.9(or 40 for round numbers). Thinking primarily about landscape pano's.
There are guidelines for resolution vs viewing distance but I don’t have those guidelines here, you can look them up or maybe someone will post them.
Jun 5, 2023 13:40:26 #
As others said, 300 ppi is a 'gold standard' for a print of any size. Also as said, the larger the print, the further you'll tend to stand away from the print. At 300ppi, it will look great held very close, whether a 4x6in print you can hold just 8-inches from your nose, or a 4x6-foot print that again you can stand just 8-inches away and see all the amazing detail. But, for the most part, you can drop down to 200ppi as you go over 20-inches long on one side, without any problems / deficiencies in that print quality of this larger size.
Jun 5, 2023 14:08:26 #
Elmo55 wrote:
I need some clarification: My understanding is that if you take the pixels dimensions, and divide by 300 that will give you the size that you can safely expect to be able to print. i.e. for example, if the size is 6000X4000, then you can print it 20"X13.3". Keeping that same ratio, can you print it larger? Say 60X39.9(or 40 for round numbers). Thinking primarily about landscape pano's.
I made a 40x60-inch print that was hung on a wall behind the reception desk where I used to work. It was taken with an 8 GB camera and turned out so well they wanted to keep it after the area was remodeled. The wall where it hung is now filled with merchandise so they moved the print to an upstairs seating area. From that experience, I learned it doesn't take 45 GB to make good prints.
Jun 5, 2023 14:48:00 #
Bridges wrote:
I made a 40x60-inch print that was hung on a wall behind the reception desk where I used to work. It was taken with an 8 GB camera and turned out so well they wanted to keep it after the area was remodeled. The wall where it hung is now filled with merchandise so they moved the print to an upstairs seating area. From that experience, I learned it doesn't take 45 GB to make good prints.
Bytes have nothing to do with digital print files, pixels do.
Jun 5, 2023 14:49:01 #
300ppi is about all the printer can print. I don't know of a printer which can print better than 400ppi even if you feed it a 24MP file and ask it to print a 4x6" print.
Jun 5, 2023 16:35:39 #
CHG_CANON wrote:
Bytes have nothing to do with digital print files, pixels do.
Jun 5, 2023 16:36:37 #
Jun 5, 2023 16:37:40 #
Orphoto
Loc: Oregon
Op wants to print landscape paoramas. Instead of fixating on the camera resolution dimensions...look to the pixel count in the file. To maximize your enlargeabilty when creating a horizontal pano, flip to vertical so the long side of the camera becomes the short dimension for printing. Or really go for it by creating a 2 dimensional array of shots for stitching.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.