Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

Over the last few days, I've had to put out some client fires related to large format wall graphics. The latest involved receiving an image (that was already cropped in 15%) from a t3i (with kit lens to boot) and blowing it up to over 9' high. Needless to say, the IQ was terrible given that people can be standing within 3' of the image. The image wasn't exposed properly from the get go and it was defringing terribly and full of chromatic aberrations. Despite all my magical skills, the image truly needed to be reshot. I would have accepted an image from a 24mpx DSLR (at a bare minmum), but preferred something from a 36+mpx sensor...What I got was an image from a 20mpx 6D. Luckily, the photographer sent properly exposed RAW files along with the JPG's so that I could squeeze enough details out of the image to be produced at 17,100 px (on the long edge) @150ppi. It's not going to be perfect, but in this case it will certainly be better than if I had to use the original image.

Goodtimes....

Bob Werre

Many years ago a photographer friend was hired to produce very large images for full height lobby interiors. He purchased a low-end lens for his 8 x 10 camera resulting in inferior results, he found out 35mm Kodachromes worked better. These were all '3D scene' shots so critical sharpness wasn't totally necessary. Fast forward to digital capture-- I had to capture store shelves containing product with printed copy--things like '16 ounces' and other smaller dot images on the packaging. I shot with a Nikon D800 + 60mm micro and captured the scene with a 4 image pano. Then used On1's up-res program for the final output size. We produce a really decent final graphic where everything was as sharp as I've ever seen it. I've only produced one graphic for a 50' trailer--here I rented a hi-end Phase One camera back--it worked fine too but it didn't contain fine copy either. It's still important to have every part of the image 'chain' working for you!

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Yeah, Clint, the all-important factor is viewing distance. Normally, a 9'x6' UNCROPPED t3i image (properly exposed with a good lens) would look okay... but only from a distance of 11 to 17 feet! Your "150 PPI" print still will be pretty soft, even at three feet, because to get 150 PPI out of it, you had to enlarge it about three times, so the out-of-camera-onto-print resolution of a full frame 5472x3648 pixel Canon 6D image printed to 9x6 feet is 50.67 PPI. From three feet away, that's like viewing an 8x10 printed at 152 PPI from 12 inches (where PPI refers to original, un-altered pixels created in the camera or your raw imaging software). Since an 8x10 needs 240 input PPI from the camera file to look fully detailed... it will be a LITTLE soft.

I'd bet the client will be okay with it, though, unless the subject matter is highly detailed (like a group of 600 people).

HOPEFULLY, the image is too big (9x6 or 6x9 feet) to be viewed without stepping back to see the whole thing.

Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

I printed from my office a 100% 11x17 section and felt that it would suffice. Outside of me heading down there to use the HR mode on the em1ii to get an 80mp RAW file, I have to make do with what they gave me. It's soft but once you stand back 4' the softness goes away. Besides, college students won't be that critical of it...it's going in an apparel store on campus.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

For a print to be viewed at 36" and still appear sharp, you need 89 ppi, or 9612 pixels on the long side, or if you have standard aspect of 1.5, you'd need an image that is 9612x6408, or 61.6 mp. You can interpolate (upsample) an image a little up to that size without too much loss in image quality, but you'd need to use a 36mp Nikon D8XX or a 50mp Canon 5DS/R, or shoot the image as a pano so you have more pixels to work with. But given available technology, it is a little unreasonable to think that a 9 ft tall image could withstand such close scrutiny, just as it would be unreasonable to sit in the front row at the local multiplex and expect the same viewing experience as someone sitting in the 20th row. Even the high resolution Sony 4K is only 8.8 mp.

Your client needs to authorize the rental of an 80mp Mamiya Leaf, Phase One or a Hasselblad medium format camera if they insist on that level of image quality. It's absurd to think a 24mp crop camera, or a 20mp full frame camera could produce an acceptable image. Better to get and use the right tools for the job, or manage the client's expectations better, once they find out what it would cost to rent that camera.

In the meantime you can show them this:

http://www.photokaboom.com/photography/learn/printing/resolution/1_which_resolution_print_size_viewing_distance.htm

and this:

https://www.borrowlenses.com/category/medium-format-cameras

If you don't need such a camera for a full week, you can get one from $555 to $670 per day from Adorama (3 day weekend pricing for slightly more than the first day pricing available).

http://www.adoramarentals.com/c-12/medium-format
http://www.adoramarentals.com/p-~phiq180h4x/phase-one-iq180-h4x-kit

You can get the camera for $1809 for the week with an 80mm lens, then you'd need to add $525 for the damage waiver, and another $135 for a wide lens. You'll be amazed how quickly their expectations will adjust to reality once they see the price tag. They will either write the check or proclaim that what you gave them was "good enough." If you could upsample an image from a lower mp, smaller sensor camera and still get great results, there would be no market for the medium format niche. You can't. This is why there are medium format choices.

Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

Im 17,100 px (on the long edge)...crazy huh...

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Can't imagine that would even come close to looking ok - with pixels and grain the size of garbanzo beans. Just sayin'

Maybe you'll get a chance to work with some really nice tools if you can talk them into the rental thing. . .

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

There must be a program that converts the pixels in to Seurat pointillism. Then you just tell them it is fashionable and a learning experience for the children.

Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

I have mad skills as a graphic designer with 18+ years of experience ;-) Luckily, custom printed wallpaper doesn't quite have the clarity like a traditional print. There's a texture to the media and the large format printers do an excellent job of hiding imperfections. That said, it's not to my typical standards, but sometimes you have to work with what they give you and make the best of it. If I make it down there with my gear, I'm definitely going to shoot it with my EM1 and 75mm on HR mode to get an 80mpx raw file. Those files I believe are somewhere in the 10000px on the long edge.

Kissel vonKeister Loc: Georgia

That Olympus hi-res mode might just prove to save the day if you get to re-shoot. With stunning optics, strong tripod, and IS off (which it does automatically) you should end up with as good an image as anything could produce. Gotta love Olympus. That 75 is wonderful, but if the comp is too tight the 45 f1.8 is probably as good.

Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

I better bring both, just in case...and the 150f2 ;-)