Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
I too would like to knowI realize much depends on the quality of the printer, image, viewing distance, expectations of the viewer.....but what's the experience of folks here re resolution for making gallery or sales quality prints?
240 dpi for files from cameras without an AA filter (although i'll go as low as 200 for files from the Betterlight), 300dpi for the others.My rule of thumb (from something I read on the Web years ago) has been a minimum of 240 dpi for "photo quality" prints. I realize much depends on the quality of the printer, image, viewing distance, expectations of the viewer.....but what's the experience of folks here re resolution for making gallery or sales quality prints?
Gary
If I was to follow that literary max print size I could get out of D3X would be 20" on the longer size and I would need P65+ to get 30".240 dpi for files from cameras without an AA filter (although i'll go as low as 200 for files from the Betterlight), 300dpi for the others.
not sure how other's do it.. but it's been the same way with me for the last 30 years.. film or digital. When the 'artifact' detracts from the image, i've gone too large. just as I wouldn't print a 35mm slide at 30", i wouldn't do that with digital either. With film, at least, there can be an aesthetic to the artifacts (grain), and that can work enlarged in some cases (but not all). digital artifacts, at least to my eyes, and the eyes of my customers, are lacking in any aesthetic..(color noise, jaggies, and the 'fake data' that resampling produces). Of course, i come from an era where 20" on the long side is a very large print.If I was to follow that literary max print size I could get out of D3X would be 20" on the longer size and I would need P65+ to get 30".
So how people shooting digital do it?
Dittoes. Quality is in the eye of the beholder. I made 6x9' (yes foot) from a 5mp camera that was surprisingly acceptable. Is it "high quality"..... no but you can count the bricks on the house in the photo. At 10 feet it looks great. Native resolution for the E-P1 or E-P2 is 360 dpi for an 11x14". Go from there. If I'm going to make a large 40 or 50" landscape picture with mine, I always shoot several and stitch. The Pany 20mm on my E-P1 is an incredible lens and camera combination.not sure how other's do it.. but it's been the same way with me for the last 30 years.. film or digital. When the 'artifact' detracts from the image, i've gone too large. just as I wouldn't print a 35mm slide at 30", i wouldn't do that with digital either. With film, at least, there can be an aesthetic to the artifacts (grain), and that can work enlarged in some cases (but not all). digital artifacts, at least to my eyes, and the eyes of my customers, are lacking in any aesthetic..(color noise, jaggies, and the 'fake data' that resampling produces). Of course, i come from an era where 20" on the long side is a very large print.
I've sold thru galleries, and if the owner had ever seen something that distracted from the image, they'd of refused to sell.
i've seen people reporting that they get high quality 30x40" prints from a 6Mp camera. 'high quality' is a relative measurement.
(20" on the long side is probably the largest i'd print from the M9 and consider it 'high quality').
Jim has nailed it here. The only thing I would add is that the content also dictates how large you can print it. Images with lots of high frequency detail will not be able to be printed as large as smoother images. Post processing makes a large difference too -- proper color noise reduction and sharpening (meaning done well, not done a lot!) go a long way into blending digital artifacts into the image (because you never really remove them...just hide them) and allowing it to be printed larger without them being noticed. Most of my clients work with Canon and Nikon (or film), so I cannot speak to the Panasonic or Olympus cameras, but I would not expect to be able to print them much larger than 40x50cm in most situations while maintaining best quality.not sure how other's do it.. but it's been the same way with me for the last 30 years.. film or digital. When the 'artifact' detracts from the image, i've gone too large. just as I wouldn't print a 35mm slide at 30", i wouldn't do that with digital either. With film, at least, there can be an aesthetic to the artifacts (grain), and that can work enlarged in some cases (but not all). digital artifacts, at least to my eyes, and the eyes of my customers, are lacking in any aesthetic..(color noise, jaggies, and the 'fake data' that resampling produces). Of course, i come from an era where 20" on the long side is a very large print.
I've sold thru galleries, and if the owner had ever seen something that distracted from the image, they'd of refused to sell.
i've seen people reporting that they get high quality 30x40" prints from a 6Mp camera. 'high quality' is a relative measurement.
(20" on the long side is probably the largest i'd print from the M9 and consider it 'high quality').
Thank you for saying this as I have been pondering along the same lines in myself and in conversations with friends. If I needed to print high quality _realistic photo_ then yes I should strive for highest dpi I can get.There is no consistent relationship between print size and MP for fine art prints.
Content, technique and money will determine how large you can print. And by content I'm not talking about pixel level details, I'm talking form, value, color, stuff like that. Technique matters because as you go really big you need to be able to deal with artifacts.
There is, of course a sub-genre that depends on an enormous density of data. This type of photo is highly dependent on the pixel count of the original image. In my experience, the vast majority of really good images do not fall into, or close to, this category.
So, print as big as you want. Are you an artist or not? Does it look good? It does? Then it is good.