glen_h

They have plenty of bits, so that isn't the problem. At some point, there is the diffraction limit that you can't escape with tiny optics. Shutterfly recommends 8 MP for the really huge prints, but 3MP is enough for even up to 20x30 inch: https://support.shutterfly.com/s/article/Photo-Resolution-Tips-1 There are minimum where it won't even try that are somewhat smaller than those values.

Pasadena at midnight.

My fifth grade class. With a Canon VI which my dad trusted me enough to take to school. (After he bought a Pellix.)

Pasadena police at midnight.

Pasadena at midnight, after a football game.

Yesler swamp trail in stereo. The Argus stereo camera puts the two images side by side in one 35mm frame.

A rose in December!

Pike Place Market

Midnight in Pasadena, after a football game. I believe on Ektachrome 400.

Taken on the cheapest fisheye camera ever made, overpriced at $35.

Taken on the cheapest fisheye camera ever made. The lens blocks the non-fisheye view finder!

Camp Oljato Boy Scout camp -- how many people in one rowboat?

Colonial Williamsburg

Many, if not most, commercial printers now scan and then print the scanned negative on wet-process laser scanned printers. The data sheet for Fuji Crystal Archive mentions its reciprocity properties between microsecond and minute exposures. It works well either way. But otherwise, I have many negatives from 7th and 8th grade yearbook photography 50 years ago. Some got printed and are in the yearbook, though I don't have my yearbooks anymore. But now many are scanned and shared online, unlike anyone expected 50 years ago. And yes, many more recent negatives get scanned and not printed, wet or dry.