Can I get a DIGITAL image with more than 150MP if my model is human?

I want to do very large (72" x 48") prints of shots that I'd take of human models.

I considered shooting 11x14 film, but no one makes drum scanners now and flatbed scanners are downright pathetic. And to pay a company to scan my negative for me costs more than $100 per image, which I won't do. I considered using a digital camera to scan, but I saw those results and they're also pathetic compared to a good scanner.

The PhaseOne is 150MP and it would get me 200PPI at the size that I want to print. That's reasonable, but I'd like to have 450 or more.

The A7R4 can do 240MP with pixelshift and that would give 265DPI, but it rarely works out. Tony Northrup did a video on this, and he explained that he can rarely get a good shot because even with still subjects, there was some kind of micro movement (perhaps cars distant cars?) that caused blur.

I could use any high res body and then stitch, but the model can't move. And how would my model stay still long enough for me to get four or more images that I'd stitch?


... So, is there any way to get more than 150MP when shooting a human model if I won't pay the fee someone with a drum scanner would be asking for?

Rent 9 Fuji GFX100’s and link them up like a tic-tac-toe board and stitch them.

FarmerTed1971 wrote in post #18979199
Rent 9 Fuji GFX100’s and link them up like a tic-tac-toe board and stitch them.

I wish that would actually work. I'd get nine 5Ds R.

icor1031 wrote in post #18979204
I wish that would actually work. I'd get nine 5Ds R.

But that's only half the res.

I don't have an answer to your question, but I AM curious why 9qty 50MP 5DS (= 450MP) won't work?
Or 5 of the Fuji's?

Of course you'd need nine of the same lens as well, something with a narrow field of view, (maybe the affordable 200mm f/2.8L)

...but with a wireless remote trigger, you would get the shot (or all nine shots) every time.

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #18979320
I don't have an answer to your question, but I AM curious why 9qty 50MP 5DS (= 450MP) won't work?
Or 5 of the Fuji's?

Of course you'd need nine of the same lens as well, something with a narrow field of view, (maybe the affordable 200mm f/2.8L)

...but with a wireless remote trigger, you would get the shot (or all nine shots) every time.

I'd be too close to the model for the image from all nine cameras to visibly converge. For example: setting a camera 6" lower changes the look of the image quite a bit, at least at 85mm.

Maybe it would work with 200mm as you suggested, but I don't like that perspective. I use 35 to 135, but almost always 85.

And we're talking equivalent focal lengths. If I'm stacking cameras like that, I'd need more like 400mm and I'd stitch the images.

What is the planned viewing distance of this large print. If you are standing 8-10 feet away, maybe 200 DPI will be sufficient.

rwmson wrote in post #18979423
What is the planned viewing distance of this large print. If you are standing 8-10 feet away, maybe 200 DPI will be sufficient.

Agreed.
About 8-10 feet, maybe slightly closer, is typical for most museum and gallery experiences. All artwork needs a little "breathing room" to be appreciated. At these suggested distances I doubt most folks could tell the difference at anything over 200 DPI.

sapearl wrote in post #18979424
Agreed.
About 8-10 feet, maybe slightly closer, is typical for most museum and gallery experiences. All artwork needs a little "breathing room" to be appreciated. At these suggested distances I doubt most folks could tell the difference at anything over 200 DPI.

Ever seen an exhibition by Gregory Crewdson? He has this large prints (not 72" but typically 50") and part of the fascination is that you can get close and still have this incredible crispness and sharpness in the print. The high resolution changes something in the way you perceive the pictures, especially if you don't just statically stand there but move through the exhibition. It also depends on the organizer and how close they let you approach the artwork.

drmaxx wrote in post #18979468
Ever seen an exhibition by Gregory Crewdson? He has this large prints (not 72" but typically 50") and part of the fascination is that you can get close and still have this incredible crispness and sharpness in the print. The high resolution changes something in the way you perceive the pictures, especially if you don't just statically stand there but move through the exhibition. It also depends on the organizer and how close they let you approach the artwork.

Well, I can't disagree with the point you're making, if the urge is to get up close like you say; that's true. If this is the intent of the OP then what he wants, what he wants. It sounds like he may be doing this for clients. If that is the case then the question is: Is that truly what THEY, and are they willing to pay the costly tab for producing to work? Of course all of this is just speculation on my part.

"flatbed scanners are downright pathetic"

I don't agree with this statement at all. While flatbed scanners won't give you the same resolution or sharpness of a drum scanner, they are certainly capable of producing excellent results from medium or large format film. I scan 6x6 and 6x9 B&W negatives on a 15+ year old Epson and get prints (12 x 18 - near the max I can print) suitable for exhibition - as do many others. Some people claim they can't tell the difference between prints they've made this way and traditional darkroom prints of the same image.

Most people who shoot film do so because they like the "film look," which is not necessarily the super-sharp digital image a lot of people are use to. I'm not inferring one's better than the other, just a different esthetic.

If you want to go digital I believe the three cameras that come close are the Hassy-H6D-100c, the Hassy-H6D-400c, and the FUJIFILM GFX 100. Those 3 cameras are 100mp+. They are not cheap though but probably cheaper than 9 5Ds' and a lot easier to work with. Not sure why you need such high resolution though. I have seen the outputs of the Hassy cameras printed large and they are quite impressive.

rwmson wrote in post #18979423
What is the planned viewing distance of this large print. If you are standing 8-10 feet away, maybe 200 DPI will be sufficient.

Viewers will walk right up to the prints.

sapearl wrote in post #18979483
It sounds like he may be doing this for clients. If that is the case then the question is: Is that truly what THEY, and are they willing to pay the costly tab for producing to work? Of course all of this is just speculation on my part.

This is for me. I want to create a miniature gallery in my future home -- because I like sharing my creations, and because it might help me to get paying clients (this is a hobby though, not a career). But I want the extreme detail, even if viewers don't; I think it's very cool.

Totally forgot about the Phase-One camera system. If extreme detail is what you seak, your not going to get any better than this. The XF IQ4 back supports 150MP. One of the most outstanding cameras ever created.