D300/Printing

[mr. sullen]

What is the largest size print this camera can achieve of a full color portrait

while maintaining highest quality and detail at normal viewing distance? And

would the TIFF setting be best to achieve it?

[lwg]

You have asked a question that can't be answered. If you define what you mean by highest quality and your normal viewing distance then you can simply figure it out.

 

RAW would be the best way to handle it, not tiff.

[ellis_vener_photography]

i've printed a few 16 x20 prints from D300 files. Not quite the quality of D3 files at that size but very good indeed.

[mr. sullen]

I suppose by quality I mean good sharpness and color. Distance? I don't know how about 4 feet.

[lwg]

Shay, color will be the same no matter how large you print it. Sharpness can also be made very high. What you will loose as you go bigger is detail. At 4 feet you can probably get a pretty good looking 20x30. As you move closer you will see that it isn't as detailed as you might like or expect. But from far enough away it will look superb.

[mr. sullen]

Yes I realize distance is a factor. It's hard for me to figure out how to word it correctly. I suppose I should say, what would be the largest print a D300 can produce while maintaing the highest amount of detail viewed from four feet away? Are you saying that 20x30 is probably the biggest one should go? A TIFF File contains more info than a RAW file so would that not be better for large prints? Or is it negligable? Also Bit-Depth does not effect printing and only pertains to viewing on screens? It says in the manual that 14-bit increases the color data recorded so would not 24-bit capture even more color data? So if it's capturing more color data does this mean there is a broader range of color in the photo that would translate on the print?

[douglas lee]

Shay, a TIFF file does not contain more information than a RAW file. A TIFF file is larger due to

the manner in which the data is formatted/structured. However, since a TIFF file is derived

from RAW data it can't contain more information than the RAW. Just as a print does not

contain more information than its corresponding negative.

[lwg]

No, I am not saying 20x30 is the largest that the D300 can do given a 4' viewing distance, but I would guess it is about right. Some day I may test it, but I like to put my nose up to the prints, so I would set my criteria to 12 inches for the viewing distance.

 

In addition 14bit (or 12) bit capture refers to per channel color bit, so multiply by 3 and you get image bit depth. So a 14bit raw file actually is 42 bits. The 24 bit file is actually 8 bits per channel. Keep in mind your eye can't really see more than 8 bits per channel. It is only when you manipulate the image that the extra bits are really important.

[aginbyte]

Aside from the technical considerations of file size, the content of the image is also a factor.

If you have a shot of a winter landscape with a graded grey sky, then the interpolation can

cause problems in ways that would never show of a more complex shot, for example, a forest

with rushing water. The complexity of the image can hide faults as well. The best thing to

do is to experiment. If you don't want to waste paper and ink on hundreds of tests, perhaps

the best thing to do would be to take small patches of your original images and print them at

different sizes and resolutions. That way you can get a feeling for the results quickly and

efficiently. After this kind of testing, then try full size prints.