Very large print from 10D

[stefanovandelli]

I need to enlarge a 10D photo to 27"x36" (approx.), that's inches.

Have any of you done anything similar and how did you get about

achieving a quality image at that size? Finally, do you know of any

lab in the UK South West that could successfully undertake the task?

[fotografz]

A print that large from a 10D file will require serious interpolation.

While there are many interpolation programs to do a good job at

intermediate sizes, I'd look at the Genuine Fractals version which

is really at it's best on sizes from 30X40 on up.

 

We did 9 foot wide posters that were mounted to 3/4" fomecore

and then laminated starting with D1-X tiff files (17.5 meg) and

using Genuine Fractals to get them up to that size with excellent

results.

[witolda_maruszewska]

I know that a colleague of mine can get 30 x 20 inch prints off his 1D if that's any help. Given that the 1D is only 4 Mp, you shouldn't have any problems going that size from a 10D if the original shot is sharp enough.

 

He gets them done over the internet - from www.printing.com, I believe. Hope this helps.

[stefanovandelli]

Thanks for your responses. The only way to do this over the net would be if the lab undertakes the task of interpolating the file. I don't even want to think how big the TIFF would be for 27x36x300dpi, certainly to big even for my ADSL line.

[carnagex_carnagex]

About 100MB or so for the file. Pick up the trial version of Genuine Fratcals Print Pro.

Download the demo here:

http://www.lizardtech.com/download/

?x=2&p=67&o=2&titl=Download%20Genuine%20Fractals%20PrintPro%203.0%20-

%20Trial%20Version

[andrew robertson]

I have made around eight 20x30's with my 10D. They have all turned out very

VERY nicely. I used no interpolation, but output was on photo paper and not by a

printer, which helps immensely.

[yadayadanoonecares]

I've made 1 print that large, and was very good. However, it very much depends on the content of the image. Wheter or not digital enlarges 'nicely' will largely depend on the ability of resolved detail.

 

For example, a portrait will enlarge very gracefully, as the 10d has no problem whatsoever recording all the detail in the image. However, a landscape, with tiny branches against a sky, in the distance, is a whole different matter (large blowup will/might/propably seem very 'fuzzy').

 

Additionally, use ISO 100, max 200. I know noise at iso 800 with 10d is okay when not enlarging bigger as 8x10", but larger then that, any noise will show up horridly (simply because the noise isnt 'blended' by the eye anymore).

 

But from a full-frame 10d image, a 27"x36" image, I am very confident it will look amazingly good when viewed from 20" or more distance.

 

I enlarged a 40% crop of my 10d (so 60% of the image cut-off, dont ask), and had it printed at 20x30 inches (50x70cm, i know, odd format), and it surpassed my expectations. However, this was from an image at ISO200, well lit, tack sharp (L glass, tripod), and a scene where all detail was able to be resolved by the 10d.

 

good luck

 

(for what it's worth, you are likely to be amazed how well the 10d images enlarge!).

 

As a last side-note, somehow my 'medium' sized prints look 'so-so', while poster formats look as great as the small ones. Propably has to do with viewing distance. Small prints / very large prints have a better balance between 10d resolution and viewing distance I guess.

[photobyalan.com]

The people who tell you you can't get big prints from a 10D probably don't own one.

 

A 27x36" print from the 10D is not going to be as good as one from a 6x7 negative, but I'll wager it will be better than the same size from 35mm, all other things being equal. At any rate, as long as your viewers are not going to put their noses up against it, it should be at least "acceptable".

[v_s]

There are a trick from Adobe Elements 2.0 book I recomend

( APE 2.0 fro Photographers - very nice one )

 

They say : use interpolation and increase size 10% many times

till you reach the size you want. Compare to imideat interpolation

to let aay 1200% it shoudl be better. I belive it will be simialr to "fractal" type interpolation.

 

Also, I printer images ( portrets) realy big 60''X60'' without doing anything, just using ScanvecAmiable Photo Print Server RIP ( on HP5500) ( standard interpolation I guess) and if you ar enot sharpening image results are simply amazing.

[kelly_flanigan1]

Jeepers; we once did sub VGA barbie cam 240x320 pixel images to 24x32" court posters; at 10 pixels/inch. A woman took weekly photos of her breast reduction results; that went sour. These were placed about 15 to 20 feet away from a jury; and were very effective. No doctoring is allowed; ie fractels; about 15 posters were made at 10 pixels per inch.<BR><BR>Find a local printer; and do some prints and samples. If they know what they are doing; they should have samples already; at all goof resolutions....<BR><BR>We print alot of 1.3; 3.3; 6 Megapixel files at 24x32" sizes; or on larger 32x40" boards. The biggest problem is not resolution; but horrid blown highlights. At least with scanned film; there is some onfo on the shoulder area. Many times we scan court/police 35mm negatives for trial posters; shot with disposable fuji and Kodak cameras. The center resolution is better than digital sometimes; the edges only fair. With digital; the workflow is easier for a non blown highlight image. I prefer the more control of scanned film; because the typical blown highlights we get yield poor results; wide open areas of 255 on Photoshop. <BR><BR>Some clients have big 6 megapixel cameras; but shoot and submit images at lower resolutions; for giant court posters. This seems abit weird that they dont get bigger cards; and always shoot full res. <BR><BR>How large a print is determined by the viewing distance; do some samples; view them at your chosen distance. A 10D will do a billboard just fine; the resolution required here is only 6 pixels/inch or less.