Enlarging to 16X24; tips?

[dsze]

I've got an image that I'm trying to enlarge (from 10D) to 16X24 and not quite getting the results that I want. I'm upsizing 110% with a mixture of bicubic & bicub. smoother, and then using NeatImage as the final step. The image is ok, but not quite good enough. Any suggestions in addition to or instead of the method I'm using. Its a good, properly exposed and sharp RAW image that I'm starting with.

thanks,
daniel

[Scottes]

I'd use NI as the first step, then the 10% upsize but test a small section and try a few variations. For some things I liked bicubic smoother, b-smoother, b-sharper until the final size is reached. For other things I like s-smoother, b-sharper, b-sharper. I had a painted turtle that looked fantastic with Genuine Fractals - it might be worth a trial download of some upsizing programs.

Also, save the contrast adjustment for last, or at least most of it. Sometimes the sharpening blows out too soon.

Also, over-sharpen a bit. For a 300DPI print I like to view at 25% and sharpen until it looks good on screen.

[tim]

Are you printing it yourself? If so Scottes said pretty much what i'd do. If a professional lab is printing it let them do the upsizing, they do a better job, their RIP software does cool things with curves instead of adding more pixels.

[Rick Baker]

Do it in steps instead of resizing all in one step. Consider getting Genuine Fractals.

[ajmcdo]

I agree with Rick Baker... Genuine Fractals.
The latest version can also be activated via "file automate" to size up or down as desired.

Tony McDonogh

[tim]

I tried the step method and genuine fractals and neither impressed me. Everyone should try it themselves, compared it with a single step upsize in photoshop, with bicubic sharpener and bicubic smoother.

[Scottes]

I did a fairly intensive study on upsizing and found that the best method really depended on the image. http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=37151

But I also found that from 2 feet away it didn't really matter. http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=37558

[dsze]

Thanks for the Tips...I think I have something that I'm happy with now. We'll see how the print looks. Scottes, at what %age on monitor most closely represents the way an image will look on the wall from 3-4 ft away? Any ideas?

thanks,
daniel

[Scottes]

Smaller than 25% I'd say. But anything less than 25% starts incorporating some unwanted resizing methods and anti-aliasing so the results would be less than ideal. Go with 25% and back away from your monitor a bit.

[schmoelzel]

I regulary print 16 X 20 inch prints from RAW Canon 1D files and I just use PSCS to upsize......they look really really good but I do get them done on a LightJet printer which apparently is able to upsize much better than any home printer. I am surprised that you are not getting the quality from the 10D that you are expecting..........

[pski]

There is a possibility that the photos isn't sharp to start with. If the photo isn't clean to begin with, it won't blow up well. I make 16x20 prints from my 10D all the time with NO problems what soever. I haven't done 20x30 but I know if should be fine as long as the orginal image is clear.

Also, I have witnesses at a expo the 10D (unknow on the shooting setting, I am guessing RAW) take a photo and the on sight tech print a 24x60 i think , Pretty much life size, in a matter a minues on site using epson printers.

[dsze]

Well, maybe I'm just being too picky. This is a famiy photo thats going on the living room wall...I'm in it. I'm usually on the other end of the camera. The image was exposed perfectly and is tack sharp to begin with, so I don't think thats the issue. Maybe it'll be great. At 80% on monitor it looks great, but at 100% it starts to not look perfect. I'll let you know how the print turns out. thanks for all the tips.

-daniel

[GSHodg]

When you have re-sized an image and want to apply final sharpening, how do you know how much is 'right'?

I know each image is different, so I'm not looking for a magic set of parameters for unsharp mask, but at what zoom setting on my monitor (100%, 25%) should I look at the image to decide what looks 'right'. And at that size should it look 'just right' or 'over-sharpened'.

Right now I'm doing a batch of 15 images at 12"x8", sending them to Photobox for printing.

Thanks.

[Scottes]

Alas, each image is different. When I have a very important print I'll crop an important 1800x1200 (4"x6") portion of the near-final image. I'll then sharpen it at 3 different strengths and maybe play with saturation and/or contrast. I then get those printed as tests. For $0.19 each it's cheap, although the wait does stink.

[GSHodg]

Thanks Scottes, a very pragmatic but sure-fire approach. I like it.

[dsze]

Ok... the print looks AMAZING! I'm very impressed. I guess I was just too critical viewing the image at 100% on monitor. The actual print looks great even with my nose practically touching it. Its already on the wall. Thanks for all the help. BTW, I used a combo of upsizing by 10% bicub and bicub smoother, and used NI toward the end of the upsizing, then final sharpening and a slight contrast boost with levels, curves and then USM 20/10/0. It looks great...looks like I could have easily gone up 2 or 3 more sizes and still been nearly perfect.
-daniel

-daniel

[RodBarker]

Yes Daniel , a printed print shows the sharpness way more than a monitor can as it shows you only 72 dpi on screen , somebody said about taking a small full crop of a fine detailed section and print that to see where your at , thats my workflow on any large print .

Rod

[tim]

Alas, each image is different. When I have a very important print I'll crop an important 1800x1200 (4"x6") portion of the near-final image. I'll then sharpen it at 3 different strengths and maybe play with saturation and/or contrast. I then get those printed as tests. For $0.19 each it's cheap, although the wait does stink.

Home printers are cheap, my iP5000 does a good job of proofs. I often print a photo at A4 size (or whatever it is) before I get it printed large (20*30 inch). You can spot some problems on paper than you miss on a monitor, don't know why, but I often do.