How do you create very large canvas wrap gallery images for their specified 300 DPI?

[fuccisphotos]

<p>Hi All,</p>

<p>Most all companies I've seen for making prints and canvas wraps look for a minimum of 300 dpi. With my 5dmkII's full res being 5616 × 3744 <em>pixels the max size </em>would be 18.72"x12.48" if you didn't crop the image one bit. But I know I have seen MUCH LARGER enlargements made from shots made on this camera model. So my question is, what are you doing to get these much larger enlargements? Do you just let DPI suggestions fly to the wind, or do you go into say photoshop and do an image enlargement for the file? </p>

<p>Also for canvas wrap prints and enlargements, do you suggest doing any sharpening to the image? </p>

<p>Thanks very much!</p>

<p>-Vail</p>

[wedding-photography-denver]

<p>Hi Vail,</p>

<p>Genuine fractals is one, On One is another and there are several more that are designed to do this specific task of uprezing your image to specs for printers.</p>

<p>Yes on the sharpening, but not until you have uprezed it. USM is the preferred method with settings something like:<br>

500;0.2;2.</p>

<p>Hope that helps.</p>

[Spearhead]

<p>Photoshop's bicubic smoother is as good as the separate products up to at least doubling the pixels, maybe triple. However, I have only rarely seen canvas printing requirements at 300ppi. Typically, it's 150-200 as the canvas texture makes it less necessary for lots of pixels. My own tests printing canvas showed a breakpoint around 150.</p>

[shawn_mertz]

<p>If you are getting the print from a pro lab just submit the file in its full natural size. The lab's software will size it appropriately. I can refer an excellent lab if you are looking for one.</p>

[Dave Luttmann]

<p>300ppi is overkill for canvas. I've produced 360ppi and 180ppi prints on canvas from 4x5 Fuji Pro 160 masters that looked no different. 300ppi is a waste. The paper texture gobbles up that extra rez.</p>

<p>As to interpolation, when properly post processed and sharpened, there is no difference between Bicubic smoother and other dedicated software packages. This is on print. You can see slight differences at 100% on screen....but who cares. Keep in mind, a Canon 5D2 for example can produce a print larger than 20x30 at 180 ppi. This tends to render the topic of interpolation to be a waste of time.</p>

[john_deerfield]

<p>Genuine Fractals was bought by OnOne and is now Perfect Resize. The best thing you can do is check with your lab and see what they recommend. As an example, WHCC does NOT resize an image (although as pointed out, canvas hardly needs 300dpi). Even though I have Perfect Resize (it comes in a bundle) I hardly ever use it. If a clients ordered something larger that a 16x20, I might compare different methods at 100% and see if I see a difference.</p>

[markonestudios]

<p>My knee-jerk reaction would be that 300ppi prints for gallery wraps would be overkill too. </p>

<p>I have printed 24x36 inch prints from my 400D (XTi) - a 10MP sensor. Very sharp at that. I used PS to do the uprezzing and added some sharpening once upsized. It was a few years ago, so I don't recall the exact settings. Now with PS CS5, I'm sure the result would be even better.</p>

<p>A lot depends on viewing distance, a topic which has been discussed several times here on PN.</p>

[Brad_]

Some 20x20 prints (on paper) were made from my cellphone images at 1,936 pixels and they looked really

good. Heh, that's 97 ppi...