charryl Loc: New Mexico, USA

It is definitely worth printing if YOU think it is. A couple of suggestions: if you are comfortable with imaging software I would suggest darkening the background. It will make the colors "pop" more in a print. Also, I highly suggest doing some selective sharpening on the butterfly. Prints made from what you see on screen are not as sharp....it's the way ink works. Sharpening a little will counter the softening effect of printing. Other than that you are getting great advice from others on this thread. One last thing, if you can do a soft proof on your computer, this will tell you if your colors are in or out of gamut, I.e., is your printer capable of printing the exact colors you see on your screen. But no matter what...have fun!

Macbadger Loc: Illinois

I have dealt with Adorama many times, and have always been pleased with the experience.

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

You are the one who decide if its good enough (for you?). You are the one that knows the resolution of the original, you can check on your computer under 100% enlargement, to check on critical parts, if nothing else, just print it, then decide. (You should make test-prints anyway, until you have the print you want)!

albertaoldie Loc: Lloydminster Alberta

few years ago I did a lot of experimenting and reading. Somewhere I read that if you upsize all at once in photoshop the results can become quite pixelated rapidly, however if you increase the size by 10% several times to reach your goal the picture is much clearer. Lately haven't used this trick as I have Perfect Resize from OnOne software which really works remarkably well for me.
300 ppi seems to be a standard however I have printed many images as low as 200ppi with reasonable results,
Hope this helps you and have fun.

JaiGieEse Loc: Foxworth, MS

Nice image, jteee. Thanks for sharing it.

norvik1943 Loc: Jenks, OK and Domazan, France

Great shot, I'll bet is really looks good at 13x19. What paper do use, matte or glossy. Epson or HP. Staples has a home brand but wonder how it would hold up. I'm dying to get the Epson 13X19 printer, can't remember model at moment, but it retails for about $299 so in my amateur price range.

Mudshark Loc: Illinois

I love "Bizarre" questions...afterall I am a Doberman (see avatar) pretending to be a fictional fish that makes photographs for a living...hey...how strange is that???!!!
My experience is that when you go to the inkjet printing process you will be very pleased with the results (although it may take some sweat and tears to get there) but generally speaking I am often amazed at what the prints look like considering the source...I sometimes print for friends. Even shots from a damn telephone can be amazing...

jrb1213 Loc: McDonough GEorgia

Get the Canon Pro 100 $99 at adorama. Most of the commenters on this thread have said it it one of the best. It is awesome.

ttlthor Loc: Grapevine, Texas

B&H also has it available at $399 with a $300 rebate until Dec. 31, 2013. $99 final price hard to beat for this printer.

planepics Loc: St. Louis burbs, but originally Chicago burbs

Just checked...My paper is in the southwest Chicago suburbs, my printer is in central IL and my rebate form is on my futon. Only problem I have is I don't have a desk big enough for it!!

jrb1213 Loc: McDonough GEorgia

Put it where your couch used to be, It is that good

planepics Loc: St. Louis burbs, but originally Chicago burbs

LOL

lukevaliant Loc: gloucester city,n. j.

what is raW?

saichiez Loc: Beautiful Central Oregon

I was going to let this pass when I saw your first picture of the butterfly. Then I saw the second picture after you did some post processing on it.

I decided to do you the favor that no one else on the forum was willing to step up and post.

I do not intend ill harm here, but please bag that photo as a test of your new printer. I print enlargements all the time and wasted a lot of Ink thinking that enlarging images would improve them.

You know what I found?

Enlarging an out of focus image only increases the BAD focus.

I do have to admit that I am not much of an advocated of the "good enough" school of photography. I'm pretty much a pixel peeker.

Frankly, I cannot find a spot of good focus on that butterfly image, before or after. I would not expect a good photo at any size from that image from any printer. Rather than think you got a bad printer when you test it, shoot a sharp image to test the printer.

I have high regard for Canon's color printers, although I use Epson myself. Do yourself a favor and try to get a good test of your new printer, by printing from a sharp image file.

planepics Loc: St. Louis burbs, but originally Chicago burbs

It's, for the lack of a better explanation, a way of taking photos that preserve all the data the camera takes in during the process. It's a MUCH larger file than JPEG (in which the camera makes it's own choices as to how to process the picture, then compresses the file to save disc space. Pretty much all DSLRs/SLTs can shoot RAW, JPEG or both at the same time. I'm not sure about bridge or P/S cameras. It's a gazilion times easier to fix a RAW pic in terms of exposure, color correction, noise reduction, lens distortion, etc, etc. but a lot of people don't care about all that stuff. i have only experimented with RAW from time to, however I see to have more pleasing results even if it takes more time to get a final result. I hope that helps.