Printing of Wedding Photos and Albums

[haunting_your_thoughts]

Hello all,<br><br>I am new to the business and Have some questions

for those of you experienced ones in here... <br><br>I have a Rebel

XT and I need to print my pictures into the poster size of 16x20". Is

that possible? Do I have to make any adjustments in Photoshop prior

to the printing? I have Photoshop CS2 and I normally shoot in Jpeg

mode.<br><br>My next question is... What are the albums that you

provide to your customers if you shoot digital? Do you have a certain

company that you go to which does the texturing and book-binding for

you?<br><br>I have a wedding coming up in january and figured I

should start early research so that I can be well aquainted with the

field. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

[wingedrabbit]

I hope you have a fireproof jacket. Prepare to be flamed.<br>

<br>

To actually answer your question, goto:<br>

<br>

<a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/forum?topic_id=2021">Wedding Forum</a><br>

<br>

And notice the older catagories on the left. There's something there to answer your question.<br>

<br>

Good Luck!

[steve_gibbs1]

I dont mean this as any type of insult or derogatory remark but....

You are not that early in your research if your wedding is in January and you

are asking those questions now.

 

For albums, you need to shop around and buy studio samples so you can

have an idea of the real "look and feel", not just what is described on the

companys website. It also depends on your clientelle and their budgets. My

studio offers albums from $175 to $4500. The less expensive are traditional

matted pages, with either a "hinge binding" or "library bound". The more costly

(but deffinatly nicer) are "coffe table books" and flush-mount 2 page spread

builds. You will also need a wholesale connection for those albums. The sites

that sell albums to the general public are usually VERY marked up - by 30%

or more.

 

As for a Rebels ability for a 16x20, I cant say. I prefer to use a professional

system.

[steve_gibbs1]

By the way, I hope you are not charging anyone for this wedding...(?!)

[lb-]

"I prefer to use a professional system"

 

oh brother!

 

I've printed 20D images regularly at 13x19 and they looked great. I realize you're asking

about a larger size but with good up-rezing I don't see why not. Fred miranda has a PS

plugin that claims to allow for much better looking up resed prints. check the digital

darkroom forum for more specific ( and hopefully helpful) responses.

 

"You are not that early in your research if your wedding is in January and you are asking

those questions now"

 

3 months is plenty of time to get it together.

 

good luck

[steve_gibbs1]

I see plenty of "uncle bobs" with Rebels buzzing around each wedding, and

there is a reason that the B&Gs are not paying them or getting prints & albums

from them. Yes, there really is a difference between a kit cam and any pro

digital setup. A gun safe full of Hassleblads, Fuji S3s, D2X and a lot of glass is

not for stygma, Lucas, it is to make a living in a professional line of work.

Believe me, if I could get the same results from a $599 special, I would have a

lot more saved in my daughters college fund, and EVERYBODY would be

shooting weddings with point and shoots. Oh, wait................

[lb-]

"Yes, there really is a difference between a kit cam and any pro digital setup."

 

steve no one said that there isn't a difference between a hasselblad and a digital rebel.

 

the poster asked if it was possible to print from that camera to that size. the answer is

yes. it may not look that great but then it may. I'm going to guess you have absolutly no

idea one way or the other. if you have something to add to that try to make it

constructive.

 

if you feel threatened by "uncle bob" and his affordable dslr, well, get over it. "bob" is

usually a nice guy if you take a minute to talk to him and personally I do whatever I can to

help "bob" out when I can. often as not bob ends up helping me too.

 

" A gun safe

full of Hassleblads, Fuji S3s, D2X and a lot of glass is not for stygma, Lucas, it is to make a

living in a professional line of work."

 

thanks I'll have to keep that in mind. somehow though I've managed to make my living

despite no longer having a hasselblad, nor any nikon gear (switched to canon a few years

back) and believe it or not, I don't even have a gun safe!

 

go figure.

 

cheers

[steve_gibbs1]

Jake the Snake- It cant hurt to send a test shot or two to a local lab. You'll

spend a few bucks, but youll get an idea of the print max of the camera.

 

Lucas- I never said the "uncle bobs" with Rebels were threatening, and in fact

I DO help them out from time to time. But those "uncle bobs" with Rebels are

not out bidding thousands of dollars for weddings and albums. If there is no

money exchanged, then there is no problem. But if there is $2500 (example)

involved, it can give people a bad taste of the industry. It creates more of the "I

can just DO IT MYSELF" attitude. And if there is a question of whether a 16x20

is even possible, we are talking about a lower quality of print overall. 5x7's ,

fine, but most people want more than that. And yes, to learn a competitive,

creative trade, your gonna need more than 90 days. The poster said he

wanted to be "well aquainted with the field" by January.

[gluteal cleft]

Despite the camera snobbery, the Rebel XT can, indeed, produce very fine images at 16x20. Better so, in fact, than 16x20's that I've seen from certain high-priced pros with 35mm - but that's not to say that better technique can't produce better 35mm prints, either.

 

When you come right down to it, enlargement quality comes from the sharpness and amount of detail that you've recorded - be it digital or film. The more detail you record, the better the enlargement. And when you're dealing with 16x20, to get the difference between an acceptable print and a really good print takes a bit of work.

 

Whether you're shooting film or digital, you have to look at the resolution of the system as a whole - not just the film or sensor, but the lens as well - and the monkey behind the camera. With pixel sizes of 5 to 8 microns in current dSLRs, your heartbeat alone is enough to shift the image an entire pixel, which can effectively cut your resolution in half. Add in to that your muscular instability, mirror slap, panning, etc., and it adds up.

 

So, not only do you need a very sharp lens, you also need great stability in your camera. The good news is that if you do your part, yes, the RebXT will do its part, and you'll have a terrific print. It's really no different than film. If you're running around, laden with equipment, out of breath, and hand-holding the camera at 1/60th, don't expect the same sort of resolution as if it were on a steady tripod at a faster shutter speed.

 

You should, however, shoot in RAW+JPEG. If you've done your part, the JPEGs it produces will look pretty good, especially if you're not printing at more than 8x10. However, the RAW gives you much more latitude for adjustments if you want or need to, and (if nothing else) doesn't have the JPEG artifacts that are much more visible as you make larger and larger prints.

 

As parting words, I've seen 20x30 prints that came from a Digital Rebel (not even the XT) that look very poor, and I've seen some that look very good. The main differences were lens quality and camera stability, with some post-processing proficiency thrown in as well.

 

steve

[jasonsmith]

Steve

 

"A gun safe full of Hassleblads, Fuji S3s, D2X and a lot of glass is not for stygma"

 

It interesting that you grouped those three together....Do you consider the S3 a 'professional' camera?

[steve_gibbs1]

The S3's are certainly the bottom of the barrel in the safe, but, funny, I think

you proved my point for me....