Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: To Those That Print For Sale

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    724
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    To Those That Print For Sale

    What print sizes you find 12MP in EP2 capable of with good quality?

    What about 16MP in GH2 or G3?

  2. #2
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,929
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: To Those That Print For Sale

    Don't have direct experience with those cameras, but I've been awarded first and jurors choice awards with 20x24 inch prints made with a 5mpixel Olympus E1.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    724
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: To Those That Print For Sale

    Thank you

  4. #4
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Michiel Schierbeek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Amsterdam/Normandy
    Posts
    4,055
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    762

    Re: To Those That Print For Sale

    Sold some prints glued on aluminium with a plastic coating on them of 40 x 60 cm. They where made with the Olympus E-3. The subject was Harbour and they were still razor sharp.

    You can see some here

    Recently I printed bigger with captures from the G1 and GH1 even as big as 100 x 75 cm. Still oké. According to my professional printcompany there was still room for bigger sizes with the GH2.

    Michiel

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    92
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    27

    Re: To Those That Print For Sale

    With an EP2 or GH2/G3 you can safely do 20"x27" on canvas at 180 ppi

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Scottsdale, AZ
    Posts
    484
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: To Those That Print For Sale

    Geez ... I must have high standards, as my usual upper limit is 12x16 (although 15x20 will sometimes be acceptable for exceptional images).

  7. #7
    Senior Member bensonga's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    2,416
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    819

    Re: To Those That Print For Sale

    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

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    724
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: To Those That Print For Sale

    Thank you to everyone that has contributed so far

    Quote Originally Posted by bensonga View Post
    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?
    I too would like to know

  9. #9
    Senior Member JimCollum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    santa cruz, ca
    Posts
    936
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    155

    Re: To Those That Print For Sale

    Quote Originally Posted by bensonga View Post
    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
    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.

    'viewing distance' is pretty much irrelevant when looking at prints in a gallery for purchase... a customer will usually look at prints at least at arms distance, if not closer (nose-to-print) when purchasing.

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    724
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: To Those That Print For Sale

    Quote Originally Posted by JimCollum View Post
    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.
    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?

  11. #11
    Senior Member JimCollum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    santa cruz, ca
    Posts
    936
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    155

    Re: To Those That Print For Sale

    Quote Originally Posted by ZoranC View Post
    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?
    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').

  12. #12
    Member Greg Lockrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Temperance, MI
    Posts
    141
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: To Those That Print For Sale

    Quote Originally Posted by JimCollum View Post
    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').
    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.

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    724
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: To Those That Print For Sale

    Thank you all!

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Reykjavik, Iceland
    Posts
    2,310
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    9

    Re: To Those That Print For Sale

    Quote Originally Posted by JimCollum View Post
    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.
    As an aside though, I have successfully printed and sold M9 work up to 1m on the long side that still looks very impressive. It does not have the extreme fine detail that it would at smaller sizes, but it is still very convincing at arms length. It only works for some images though -- if there are fine repeating textures like blades of grass, fences or telephone poles in the distance then you can start to see the tell-tale staircase pattern from the lack of an anti-aliasing filter.
    My photos are here: http://www.stuartrichardson.com and more recent work here: http://stuartrichardson.tumblr.com/ Please have a look at my book!
    My lab is here: http://www.customphotolab.is and on facebook

  15. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    324
    Post Thanks / Like

    Post Are you an artist?

    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.

    Best,

    Bill

  16. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    724
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Are you an artist?

    Quote Originally Posted by ohnri View Post
    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.
    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.

    _But_ more often than not my "photos" are less realistic and more impressionist which might be in the end working to my advantage.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •