How is 70"x90" print possible from İQ180?Help needed?

[Ztacir]

Hello again,
İ like to have prints sized 70"x90" printed at minimum 200 dpi,preferably 240 dpi ,from files out of iq180 using Oce Light Jet.
My files are 480 mb at 16-bit and apparently not enough to print this size. İ assume İ have to make multiple shots and stitch them together.
Please help me with my dilemma
Ziya

 

[Bob]

Try this:
in photoshop first, using bicubic smoother, up-res the file in two steps to 99 inches wide at 200 dpi, then down-res to 90 inches using bicubic sharper.
Then view the image on-screen at print size.
If you have a sharp file to begin with it can look very good.
-bob

 

[Ztacir]

Bob,thank you for the quick respond.
İ will try your method ,however İ like to find a technic to capture a file big enough to get a print without using up-res .

 

[Bob]

You might be able to stitch something like a 3x3 or 4x4 stitch but that is usually not necessary.
try this technique with a file you have and print a crop from the up-resed version first and look at it very closely.
Remember also that large prints cannot usually be viewed much closer than from a distance roughly equal to the diagonal for the eye to be able to see it in its entirety.
Photographers, otoh will look at prints of whatever size at nose length distance.
One other factor is what is the printing surface that you will be using? what paper?
thanks
-bob

 

[Ztacir]

İt will be glossy paper İ guess,what do you reccommend Bob.

 

[Bob]

Oh, I don't recommend.
It depends on what you like and where it will be hung.
Very large prints also look pretty good on canvas which has a rougher texture and where you can print as low as about 40-60 dpi for a print of that size.
Do yourself a favor and simulate a large print from a single IQ180 frame by printing a crop at different dpi and up-res ratios and convince yourself.
I really doubt that there will be many viewers who will appreciate the difference between 200dpi images derived by a native resolution vs a 2x up-res on glossy paper and even a 4x upres for a print of that size.
-bob

 

[Ztacir]

Bob,İ thank you again.İ will do exactly what you said and let you know the results.
Best regards.

 

[Stefan Steib]

Ziya

Depending on the kind of structure you may have,it´s possible to get some very good results with software packages like Perfect resize 7 (former genuine fractals)

http://www.ononesoftware.com/products/suite/perfect-resize/?ind

here is a video that may be helpful.
Whereas it may be possible with lot of time and knowledge to come close to this in Photoshop, I think it is pretty painless to use PR7 for files for up to 200 % scaling with standard settings (or one of the presets) and just let it go.

especially when the files are already good (I suppose the IQ files will be) the results from this plugin will even be better.

Greetings from Munich
Stefan

 

[Dan Santoso]

Try SizeFixer XL, one of the best software.

Dan

 

[etrump]

First I'm curious how you get a 70x90 inch print out of a lightjet. Unless I am mistaken, the largest lightjet page is 50x120.

Most labs run their lightjets at 200dpi with the 300dpi mode used only when very fine text is being printed. You will also find the hardware based upsizing/sharpening in the lightjet is going to be as good or better than doing the upsizing in photoshop.

I have tested the same file using 150, 200 and 300dpi and could not see a difference without using a loupe. It was minute enough that unless prints were side by side you wouldn't notice deficiency even with a strong loupe. Remember, your dealing with continuous tone not dots of ink. The equivalent sharpness is something like 10 times a 360dpi inkjet. It's to the point that if your file is prepared properly it just doesn't matter. Furthermore, with fujiflex paper you don't lose any detail to the texture of the paper.

Not many prints 90 inches wide are viewed from a few inches with a magnifying glass. I have a 36"x96" pano in the front of my gallery that I switch out 3 or 4 times a year. The current image is cropped from a single IQ180 exposure of a scene with an incredible amount of detail that pretty much dares the viewer to nose up to inspect it. The corn field has enough detail that you can see the veins in the individual leaves and every blade of grass is discernible. You can even see the pot of flowers and curtain detail in the cabin's window. It is printed from a 150dpi file with the lightjet set at 200dpi.

 

[Wayne Fox]

First I'm curious how you get a 70x90 inch print out of a lightjet. Unless I am mistaken, the largest lightjet page is 50x120.

Most labs run their lightjets at 200dpi with the 300dpi mode used only when very fine text is being printed. You will also find the hardware based upsizing/sharpening in the lightjet is going to be as good or better than doing the upsizing in photoshop.

I have tested the same file using 150, 200 and 300dpi and could not see a difference without using a loupe. It was minute enough that unless prints were side by side you wouldn't notice deficiency even with a strong loupe. Remember, your dealing with continuous tone not dots of ink. The equivalent sharpness is something like 10 times a 360dpi inkjet. It's to the point that if your file is prepared properly it just doesn't matter. Furthermore, with fujiflex paper you don't lose any detail to the texture of the paper.

Not many prints 90 inches wide are viewed from a few inches with a magnifying glass. I have a 36"x96" pano in the front of my gallery that I switch out 3 or 4 times a year. The current image is cropped from a single IQ180 exposure of a scene with an incredible amount of detail that pretty much dares the viewer to nose up to inspect it. The corn field has enough detail that you can see the veins in the individual leaves and every blade of grass is discernible. You can even see the pot of flowers and curtain detail in the cabin's window. It is printed from a 150dpi file with the lightjet set at 200dpi.

The 500XL lightjet was 76" wide. I heard they only made about 10 of them but most are probably still running if you know a lab that has one. Don't know if anyone makes paper that wide anymore though, although you can special order from Kodak if you buy enough at any width.

I agree, most labs run their lightjets at 200dpi most of the time (prints faster) , 300 for smaller stuff if requested. Does it even do 240 dpi? I always thought it was 150/200/300, but I've never owned one.

I've printed 90" long prints from a P65 to an epson printer with very good results, I think good files at 90" on the lightjet from an IQ180 would be OK. If the scene has a lot of micro detail you want to preserve, a 5 or 6 shot stitch might be a good idea.

 

[Shashin]

Is this going to viewed at standard viewing distance? Then a single frame will be fine. If you have a good printer that knows what they are doing, then you can just hand them the files.

If you are making an image that will be viewed at 1/3 viewing distance or closer, then stitching may help. It really depends on the subject matter.

 

[Ztacir]

Prints will be done either by Grieger/Dusseldorf or Metro İmaging/London and they are one of the best in this industry as far as İ know.Prints will be exhibited in a gallery here and offered for sale.During exhibition,viewing distance should be standart since it is a spacious place.However,sophisticated collectors might investigate from closer to compare my works to works of other photographers who work with 8x10 large format files with 200 dpi prints.

 

[dwhistance]

Speaking as a printer just let Metro resize them for you if necessary. They will know their equipment and what is required to produce the quality you desire. They will also have and more importantly know how to use software for interpolation if required. I am always frustrated when clients give me files they have "uprezzed" themselves as my RIP can almost always do a better job with less artifacts.

David Whistance

 

[Wayne Fox]

Just to add, your IQ180 files uprezzed to 200% will hold together very well even upon very close examination, as long as its a good sharp file and you don't over sharpen.

As far as whether to let the lab to the uprez or do it yourself, sort of depends on how good you are at that and how good the lab is at it. If you are skilled at output sharpening and understand the process, you can probably do a better job. Many labs ask for the files to be "ready to print" - a sign they really don't have anything magical to add. Some of the high end specialty labs really do understand the process and do a great job.But many of the photo based printers don't really have anything special about their resizing algorithms, just standard stuff with less control than you have with PS. I know I can get I can get a better image from my noritsu's and chromira's if I do it myself and sent it to the printer exact size so the printer does absolutely no interpolation ... just a pixel by pixel simple rasterize to the paper. I''m unfamiliar with the Lightjet software for this.

A 200% bicubic uprez will yield you @ 230dp file. You could than downrez that to200DPI and I think you would be very happy with the results. (and I think they would be better than an odd uprez straight to the 200dpi). Do the output sharpening after you to the resize.

 

[Stuart Richardson]

Speaking as a printer just let Metro resize them for you if necessary. They will know their equipment and what is required to produce the quality you desire. They will also have and more importantly know how to use software for interpolation if required. I am always frustrated when clients give me files they have "uprezzed" themselves as my RIP can almost always do a better job with less artifacts.

David Whistance

Yes, as another custom printer, I would say exactly the same thing. Especially if you are going to use Grieger or another world class lab. It's one thing if you are just sending it to a lab that is going to run it automatically or with someone who is not a specialist, but if you are using a high end lab, most of the time they are going to know better than you how to get the best print out of their equipment. Just make sure you talk to them and find out how they intend to print it, see what they would like you to do in terms of prepping the file. In terms of sizing, they will likely ask you to give them the full size file without any size modifications. The best thing you can do is reach out to the person who is actually doing the printing and find out their advice.

I also agree with Ed that the difference between 150 and 200 or 240 dpi is not going to be a deal breaker, certainly not on a print this large. If the collectors you mention are as sophisticated as you suggest, they are going to be looking at the work, not the tiniest details.

 

[pipzz]

However,sophisticated collectors might investigate from closer to compare my works to works of other photographers who work with 8x10 large format files with 200 dpi prints.

In that case, you will not have chance. Just kidding.

 

[rga]

Ziya

Depending on the kind of structure you may have,it´s possible to get some very good results with software packages like Perfect resize 7 (former genuine fractals)

http://www.ononesoftware.com/products/suite/perfect-resize/?ind


Greetings from Munich
Stefan

Hi Stefan,
I have Perfect Resize 7 and find Bob's method of uprezzing and down razzing using CS5 to be noticeably better. That used not to be the case in CS3 and below...
Best,
Bob

 

[Kai Birkigt]

@ Wayne and Bob

Just for my better understanding: why first uprezzing it a little "too much" and then scaling it down again? Doesn't the IQ suffer from this way of proceeding more than from just scaling it once up to e. g. 200 dpi?

@ Stefan

I read a comparison a time ago (I forgot where, but could search for it) in a german source. The test showed Photoshop to be a bit better than Genuine Fractals but overall there was no big difference.

Kai

 

[jeffacme]

Let the lab do it. Most high end labs have their best printers working on large prints and that person uprezzes all kinds of files and has learned every trick in the book. I worked with a Polish fellow at a lab years ago who had the uncanny skill of viewing an 8x10 neg on a light box and pulling a perfect color print first try. Saving major dollars for the lab and making his prints very profitable.

Just because a photographer works in 8x10 does not mean those files will be noticeably superior to your IQ 180 files. The amount of skill and technique required to get the most out of 8x10 in the field is staggering and many times nearly impossible when factoring in wind, weather, setup, etc.