S2 and my impressions.

[Guy Mancuso]

Maybe not that big, Jack can answer this better with regards to the 39mpx P45 plus which I think 40x60 maybe the limit with all the detail you will want to see. One issue also is the micro lenses which with regards to Moire it tends to knock down the high Nyquist value to eliminate Moire well in my mind this also knocks down the very finest details down also. No this is my thinking and we may need some more thoughts on this from the engineers. But in general like the P30 plus with micro lenses it is highly regarded as a fashion camera which helps control some moire. Now there is pixel pitch and other stuff here also so we may need to hear from more a expert in this area. Personally I think the sensor is too small for a 40 x 60. Not sure I would push my back this far on one frame.I know my P25 plus will go a easy 20 x30 and after that Jacks P45 plus will start taking over. My feeling is you will need the higher MPX backs to get 40 x 60. Peter if you need a raw file with these backs to play with that is not a issue. Steve and Doug would be able to help here.

 

[fotografz]

Maybe not that big, Jack can answer this better with regards to the 39mpx P45 plus which I think 40x60 maybe the limit with all the detail you will want to see. One issue also is the micro lenses which with regards to Moire it tends to knock down the high Nyquist value to eliminate Moire well in my mind this also knocks down the very finest details down also. No this is my thinking and we may need some more thoughts on this from the engineers. But in general like the P30 plus with micro lenses it is highly regarded as a fashion camera which helps control some moire. Now there is pixel pitch and other stuff here also so we may need to hear from more a expert in this area. Personally I think the sensor is too small for a 40 x 60. Not sure I would push my back this far on one frame.I know my P25 plus will go a easy 20 x30 and after that Jacks P45 plus will start taking over. My feeling is you will need the higher MPX backs to get 40 x 60. Peter if you need a raw file with these backs to play with that is not a issue. Steve and Doug would be able to help here.

Guy, has anyone played with Genuine Fractals recently? I remember being stunned by the sizes you could get out of it ... I recall taking a whimpy 8 meg file up to
7 feet wide for a wall display a client needed and even the printer was stunned at how good it looked.

Thirty day free demo here:

http://www.ononesoftware.com/detail.php?prodLine_id=7&gclid=CLay8N35oZkCFSHyDAod_G7Ppw

Would be interested in hearing of anyone's experiences with the latest version of this program with these MFD backs.

 

[yaya]

I have a question WRT resolution - which s actually the most important one for my needs: do you think that the 37MP will be enough for 60" x 40" or similar print sizes (mostly landscapes)? Would there not be the need for 50 or 60MP?

How do you print?

 

[ptomsu]

How do you print?

I am not printing these sizes myself, but I have a professional print lab using Epson printers like 7900, 9900 and 11800. And they are doing an excellent job.

As paper I am using Hahnemühle Photo Rag (Matt) and Hahnemühle Artist Canvas. I am going for 300dpi (as long as I can).

So far I am getting stunning quality from my film scans (all 6x6 or 645, taken with Hasselblad, Rollei6006 or Contax645). For scanning I use a Hasselblad Flextight X5 - probably the best scanner I have found - and I have tried a lot, even high end drum scanners - BTW most no longer in production

But my future is clearly a pure digital workflow, thus I am so curious about which system I will get in.

 

[ptomsu]

Maybe not that big, Jack can answer this better with regards to the 39mpx P45 plus which I think 40x60 maybe the limit with all the detail you will want to see. One issue also is the micro lenses which with regards to Moire it tends to knock down the high Nyquist value to eliminate Moire well in my mind this also knocks down the very finest details down also. No this is my thinking and we may need some more thoughts on this from the engineers. But in general like the P30 plus with micro lenses it is highly regarded as a fashion camera which helps control some moire. Now there is pixel pitch and other stuff here also so we may need to hear from more a expert in this area. Personally I think the sensor is too small for a 40 x 60. Not sure I would push my back this far on one frame.I know my P25 plus will go a easy 20 x30 and after that Jacks P45 plus will start taking over. My feeling is you will need the higher MPX backs to get 40 x 60. Peter if you need a raw file with these backs to play with that is not a issue. Steve and Doug would be able to help here.

Thanks!

Steve and/or Doug:

this would b really great, if I could get a RAW file (preferably landscape) from a 60MP back and maybe as comparison from a 39MP back.

Not sure if you could post a link here to the files for download (because also others might be interested), or you could send the file to my email address:

[email protected]

Many thanks in advance.

 

[yaya]

I am not printing these sizes myself, but I have a professional print lab using Epson printers like 7900, 9900 and 11800. And they are doing an excellent job.

As paper I am using Hahnemühle Photo Rag (Matt) and Hahnemühle Artist Canvas. I am going for 300dpi (as long as I can).

So far I am getting stunning quality from my film scans (all 6x6 or 645, taken with Hasselblad, Rollei6006 or Contax645). For scanning I use a Hasselblad Flextight X5 - probably the best scanner I have found - and I have tried a lot, even high end drum scanners - BTW most no longer in production

But my future is clearly a pure digital workflow, thus I am so curious about which system I will get in.

What file size do you provide them and do you know what RIP do they use for the printers, if any?

As a rule of thumb, a good 90MB digital file (RGB), with a good RIP will go up to virtually any size inkjet print at 300dpi

We can argue about the X5 being the best scanner but that can be in another thread

I've got some files from 33MP and 56MP backs if you want, taken with different cameras/lenses

Yair

 

[fotografz]

Check this test of an 8.8" X 11" file from a Hasselblad H3D-31 shot enlarged to 60" using Genuine Fractals v6.0 ... I tested it against using PS to enlarge the same shot the same amount ... see what you think :

http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?p=83887#post83887

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Thanks Marc I was not thinking so far as a Rip or a software program just straight from the can sort of. I know on my Epson 3800 if I went for 40 x60 crop to match the size . I would not hold up nearly as well to bigger back.

 

[Stuart Richardson]

I don't think you will have any problems from 40x60 with 37mp, particularly with good lenses. You may not get the same detail that you get in an 8x10, but you will still get tons of excellent detail. People are not going to look at this from 2 inches away -- they will have to stand back a bit to take it in. Even when they move in to look at a detail, there will still be plenty to look at. You have to remember that people have been printing that big from earlier digital for years, and from film for even longer than that.

 

[dfarkas]

Maybe not that big, Jack can answer this better with regards to the 39mpx P45 plus which I think 40x60 maybe the limit with all the detail you will want to see. One issue also is the micro lenses which with regards to Moire it tends to knock down the high Nyquist value to eliminate Moire well in my mind this also knocks down the very finest details down also. No this is my thinking and we may need some more thoughts on this from the engineers. But in general like the P30 plus with micro lenses it is highly regarded as a fashion camera which helps control some moire. Now there is pixel pitch and other stuff here also so we may need to hear from more a expert in this area. Personally I think the sensor is too small for a 40 x 60. Not sure I would push my back this far on one frame.I know my P25 plus will go a easy 20 x30 and after that Jacks P45 plus will start taking over. My feeling is you will need the higher MPX backs to get 40 x 60. Peter if you need a raw file with these backs to play with that is not a issue. Steve and Doug would be able to help here.

Guy,

I'd think you could go a lot larger than 20x30 with your P25+ files. I routinely print out stunning 20x30s from my M8 files. In fact, I have some 20x30s printed from 22MP ZD files that don't appear any sharper/better at that size than M8 or DMR prints when comparing them side-by-side.

To me, 40x60 seems the ideal output size for the S2 at 37.5 MP. Actually, if you print a 40x60 from the P45+, because of aspect ratio, you'd only get 34.6 MP. Not a huge loss of information, but the S2 will make at least as good a print at this size, if not a touch better. Of course, we will have to wait a few more months to see for sure.

David

 

[ptomsu]

Thanks folks for your feedback so far! Seems all very logical to me!

I was considering not to upsize the images and be able to print with 300dpi, thus I came to larger MP counts than 37 or 39.

My printer uses some RIP, I do not know which one, I have to ask.

Would be interesting to see if I could go with the S2 in principle. Although I am pretty sure it will in the end not be a cheaper solution than going with the H System

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Guy,

I'd think you could go a lot larger than 20x30 with your P25+ files. I routinely print out stunning 20x30s from my M8 files. In fact, I have some 20x30s printed from 22MP ZD files that don't appear any sharper/better at that size than M8 or DMR prints when comparing them side-by-side.

To me, 40x60 seems the ideal output size for the S2 at 37.5 MP. Actually, if you print a 40x60 from the P45+, because of aspect ratio, you'd only get 34.6 MP. Not a huge loss of information, but the S2 will make at least as good a print at this size, if not a touch better. Of course, we will have to wait a few more months to see for sure.

David

Thanks David yes I know your machines with there rip can pull amazing things off . I was thinking more on the lines of end users without a rip program and there Epsons. Here in town when I go big I usually send it to a place that has a Lambda. BTW Folks Dale labs Davids place does really nice printing and that should be noted.

 

[dfarkas]

Thanks David yes I know your machines with there rip can pull amazing things off . I was thinking more on the lines of end users without a rip program and there Epsons. Here in town when I go big I usually send it to a place that has a Lambda. BTW Folks Dale labs Davids place does really nice printing and that should be noted.

Thanks for the plug, Guy! :thumbup:

You can check out the lab side of things at http://www.iprintspro.com

David

 

[Stuart Richardson]

Another thing to keep in mind is that Epson inkjets don't print at 300dpi. Their native resolutions are 360dpi and 240dpi. A lot of paper manufacturers (like Harman for the FB AL and so on) actually recommend that you print at 240dpi. If you do a test yourself and print at both resolutions, you will be very hard pressed to see a difference. Certainly, if you are printing a large print, you should set the resolution at 240dpi and you will get a larger file without interpolation, and in general, better results.
300dpi is the standard only for professional lab printing, such as Chromira, LightJet and so on. It is best to talk to your lab and find out what the native resolution of the printer is, so that you can give them a proper file. Most of these machines will automatically convert the dpi on the fly if it is not already set up at the right size.

 

[georgl]

The M8 is 22x33cm, the S2 42x63cm and the P65+ is about 76x57cm @ 300ppi. Of course that's well known theory but in my experience, that's reality, the maximum for the most demanding situations and given the best lenses really delivering fine detail with good contrast and no visible abberations at all.
Of course you can go below 300ppi, but the picture quality starts to decline visibly with fine detail. I print my M8-files up to DINA3+ (32x48cm -> 210ppi, slight loss in quality already visible) and use a fractal-based interpolation software, it works quite well on architecture (makes edges/borders "cleaner") - does it also work with "natural" structures without looking artificial- I have never tried it!?

Not seeing the difference between 22MP-MF-sensor and M8/DMR? The lens on the Mamiya must have been pretty bad!? The M8/DMR+lenses give excellent prints, much better than other 10MP-cameras given by it's lack of abberations and smoth transitions but it can't do magic. In my experience <200ppi make every artifact clearly visible.

Microlenses lower resolution or avoid moire? That seems very unlikely and far from my technical understanding of microlenses!? They can cause abberations or vignetting, but they have very little to do with the seperation from ony pixel to another (->resolution).

 

[Dale Allyn]

I started to mention native printer resolution as well, but decided I was too lazy. It's good that you brought this up, Stewart.

However, Epson is not the only printer out there. I use Canon imagePROGRAF printers, which have a native resolution of (supposedly) 600ppi. Lots of experimenting has been done with the Canons using 300ppi files and 600ppi files, and there is a tiny difference. The higher rez files get huge and smoke starts to come out of my print server, so I try to print at 300 first in most cases.

My point is mostly just a nit-pick, because I grow a bit weary of the "all Epson, all the time" print discussions. I know that they have the largest part of the market, but so does Windows have the largest part of the OS market. There are still alternatives. I scratched Epson off of my large format lists when I have to do the ink swaps or purges (even mini purges) to alternate black ink types for matte or semi-gloss papers. They have taken steps to improve this, and of course they have excellent inks, etc., but many printing discussions lose accuracy because they assume 360ppi native resolution (i.e. Epson) and other readers get some less-than-accurate info.

Cheers ,

Dale

Edit to add: I should mention that I do not print with the Canon/OS print driver, but with the provided Photoshop export plug-in, which acts as a sort of mini-RIP.

Another thing to keep in mind is that Epson inkjets don't print at 300dpi. Their native resolutions are 360dpi and 240dpi. A lot of paper manufacturers (like Harman for the FB AL and so on) actually recommend that you print at 240dpi. If you do a test yourself and print at both resolutions, you will be very hard pressed to see a difference. Certainly, if you are printing a large print, you should set the resolution at 240dpi and you will get a larger file without interpolation, and in general, better results.
300dpi is the standard only for professional lab printing, such as Chromira, LightJet and so on. It is best to talk to your lab and find out what the native resolution of the printer is, so that you can give them a proper file. Most of these machines will automatically convert the dpi on the fly if it is not already set up at the right size.

 

[jotloob]

Another thing to keep in mind is that Epson inkjets don't print at 300dpi. Their native resolutions are 360dpi and 240dpi. A lot of paper manufacturers (like Harman for the FB AL and so on) actually recommend that you print at 240dpi. If you do a test yourself and print at both resolutions, you will be very hard pressed to see a difference. Certainly, if you are printing a large print, you should set the resolution at 240dpi and you will get a larger file without interpolation, and in general, better results.
300dpi is the standard only for professional lab printing, such as Chromira, LightJet and so on. It is best to talk to your lab and find out what the native resolution of the printer is, so that you can give them a proper file. Most of these machines will automatically convert the dpi on the fly if it is not already set up at the right size.

Stuart

Thank you very much for your technical information .
I use EPSON printers .
Many of my high end scans are done by SNAP STUDIOS .
A well known professional studio here in my area. Using 848 scanners .
The scans I get from them , no matter which format the source is , is 300dpi at LStarRGB V2 profile .
I was never asked , what printers I use .
So I am a bit worried about the resolution for printing on EPSON .
Looking at EPSON driver specs , I find 2880 , 1440 , 720 , 360 , 180 dpi .
Nothing of the kind of 300dpi or 240dpi .
So I am confused about , what is the best method of transfeering files from the delivered 300dpi to 360dpi . I use CSPS4 and also GF6 .

Jürgen

 

[ptomsu]

Stuart

Thank you very much for your technical information .
I use EPSON printers .
Many of my high end scans are done by SNAP STUDIOS .
A well known professional studio here in my area. Using 848 scanners .
The scans I get from them , no matter which format the source is , is 300dpi at LStarRGB V2 profile .
I was never asked , what printers I use .
So I am a bit worried about the resolution for printing on EPSON .
Looking at EPSON driver specs , I find 2880 , 1440 , 720 , 360 , 180 dpi .
Nothing of the kind of 300dpi or 240dpi .
So I am confused about , what is the best method of transfeering files from the delivered 300dpi to 360dpi . I use CSPS4 and also GF6 .

Jürgen

Epson does natively not use 300dpi it uses 360 qand 180 or other multiples and fractions of that. My print lab uses Epson and Canon printers, but they say that Epson has advantages through their piezo elecric print heads because of finer adjustment of ink drops. I do not know, I simply trust them. And also Epson is better represented in Austria than Canon as far as my opinion goes, thus I would also buy an Epson printer if I would go for a large format printer myself. Just waiting to see their replacement of the 4880 to hold all inks at once, which is the biggest drawback of the current older series.

I actually do not care about resolution for the printer in the moment, as I can assign any resolution to my scanned files, in the Flextight X5 I am simply scanning with highets resoltion and then I care only for the output format. The resulting resolution follows then automatically in PS and this is done by the printing lab.

They are using some RIP in order to scale, but they do no upscale calculation, as they say the quality is better if I stay with lower resolution for large prints instead of running any SW over the file and artificially calculate a higher pixel count - no matter which SW. So I follow them here and I am really stunned from the results I see.

Point is, the higher the resolution one can get out of the sensor, the larger the prints can go without any massaging og the file through post processing SW, thus I try to stay to that rule (as long as I can afford it).

 

[Paratom]

I have good experience with multiples of 120dpi: 240,360,480,720 all works fine on my Epson printers. With 300 it seems that the image gets calculated and can lead to halos.
If I print larger and need the size 240 works pretty good for me.

 

[KeithL]

Stuart
Using 848 scanners .
The scans I get from them , no matter which format the source is , is 300dpi at LStarRGB V2 profile .
I was never asked , what printers I use .
So I am a bit worried about the resolution for printing on EPSON .
So I am confused about , what is the best method of transfeering files from the delivered 300dpi to 360dpi . I use CSPS4 and also GF6 .

Jürgen, the resolution of the scan varies between scanners. For instance most of my drum scans are supplied to me at 4,000 pixels/inch.

The important point is when finalising your print file and sizes you need to use 'Image Size' in Photoshop and set the resolution to 360 pixels/inch (or divisibles) before sending to the printer.

Keith