Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing 
Thread started 25 Oct 2011 (Tuesday) 16:12
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

40 inch print, so many questions.

 
ThatTeenPhotographer
Senior Member
Avatar
290 posts
Joined Aug 2011
Location: Austin, Texas
     
Oct 25, 2011 16:12 |  #1

One of my friends teaches photoshop at the college level. He has a Canon printer that's 40 inches wide, and he basically said he would love to get me a print or two from it. Now is there any way files coming off of my XSi (12.2 MP) will be any way to be printed at this size? Or should I collage a few of them into a single file to be printed then cut into individual smaller prints? If so is this doable with GIMP. Thanks in advance for any help with my noob question....


Facebook (external link)|flickr (external link)|Website (external link)
Rebel XSi (450D), 50mm 1.8 II, EF-S 18-55, Tamron AF 70-300 Di LD, CS6, Rebel 2000 & Access to Many Old Film Cameras
Working on a 365

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
44,882 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 3672
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
     
Oct 25, 2011 18:15 |  #2

The XSi has 4272 x 2848 pixels. If you enlarge that to 40" width, that is a mere 142 pixels per inch (2848/40). But if you look at it from 40" away, it will be equivalent in perceived quality to looking at a 8x12" print from 8" away.

You could resize the image and use the bicubic interpolation to increase the pixel count to 200% (9494 x 5696 pixels), and the 40" print would have 285 pixels per inch, and the print would look good even up close, but there would be no better detail within the print, merely less jaggy edges to features within the photo.


You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tonylong
...winded
Avatar
54,657 posts
Gallery: 60 photos
Likes: 548
Joined Sep 2007
Location: Vancouver, WA USA
     
Oct 25, 2011 18:19 |  #3

Well, the way a large print comes across depends on your viewing distance. Take one of your images that is visually appealing and is also good and sharp/crisp and view it in Photoshop using "Actual Pixels" (100%, Ctl-Alt-0) then move back a bit, and you decide.

Another good test is to crop a small portion of your image, one that would fill, say, an 8x10 portion of your planned print, and print it as an 8x10, and then view it from a distance that you would normally view the print, and you decide.

You can get away with good, large prints as long as you are viewing from a reasonable distance. I hang my walls with 12x16 prints made from 4-6 MP images from old P&S cameras from a few years back. They are visually pleasing images, and they work. Get real close and you can see the finer detail "breaking down", but that's real close. Then, I have 12x18 prints of shots from my old 8MP 30D where I can get up close with a magnifying glass, and the fine detail stands out very well.

The thing is, they all hang together. Some of the 4MP prints will bring out "Wows" from people that see them. They may not be gallery quality, but still...they are ones that have been "picked" by actual viewers.


Tony
Two Canon cameras (5DC, 30D), three Canon lenses (24-105, 100-400, 100mm macro)
Tony Long Photos on PBase (external link)
Wildlife project pics here (external link), Biking Photog shoots here (external link), "Suburbia" project here (external link)! Mount St. Helens, Mount Hood pics here (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ThatTeenPhotographer
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
290 posts
Joined Aug 2011
Location: Austin, Texas
     
Oct 25, 2011 18:56 |  #4

So in other words I might be able to pull it off, I'm guessing I should pick some photos from after I started shooting raw and saving at 300 dpi as opposed to my old files that are 72 though ehh :D


Facebook (external link)|flickr (external link)|Website (external link)
Rebel XSi (450D), 50mm 1.8 II, EF-S 18-55, Tamron AF 70-300 Di LD, CS6, Rebel 2000 & Access to Many Old Film Cameras
Working on a 365

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tonylong
...winded
Avatar
54,657 posts
Gallery: 60 photos
Likes: 548
Joined Sep 2007
Location: Vancouver, WA USA
     
Oct 25, 2011 19:06 |  #5

Well, that ppi figure by default has nothing to do with printing in a "normal" way. If you do want to resize your image to print at 300 ppi, you will need to follow a resize/resample process. You can do this out of Bridge using the Image Processor, or open the image in Photoshop and use the Image/Image Size dialog. Either way, you need to specify your image dimensions and choose the "Resize" option, either in pixels or in inches and ppi. The advantage to using Image Size is you have some more options, and also because you can keep the image in Photoshop if you want to do something like "output sharpening" to your final image.

Other programs such as Lightroom and DPP will let you do the resizing/resampling as well


Tony
Two Canon cameras (5DC, 30D), three Canon lenses (24-105, 100-400, 100mm macro)
Tony Long Photos on PBase (external link)
Wildlife project pics here (external link), Biking Photog shoots here (external link), "Suburbia" project here (external link)! Mount St. Helens, Mount Hood pics here (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
44,882 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 3672
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
     
Oct 25, 2011 19:09 |  #6

ThatTeenPhotographer wrote in post #13306285 (external link)
So in other words I might be able to pull it off, I'm guessing I should pick some photos from after I started shooting raw and saving at 300 dpi as opposed to my old files that are 72 though ehh

tonylong wrote in post #13306319 (external link)
Well, that ppi figure by default has nothing to do with printing in a "normal" way. If you do want to resize your image to print at 300 ppi, you will need to follow a resize/resample process. You can do this out of Bridge using the Image Processor, or open the image in Photoshop and use the Image/Image Size dialog. Either way, you need to specify your image dimensions and choose the "Resize" option, either in pixels or in inches and ppi. The advantage to using Image Size is you have some more options, and also because you can keep the image in Photoshop if you want to do something like "output sharpening" to your final image.

Other programs such as Lightroom and DPP will let you do the resizing/resampling as well

Tony's reply should really have read...
"Well, that DPI figure by default has nothing to do with printing in a 'normal' way. If you do want to resize your image to print at 300 PPI, you will need to follow a resize/resample process. You can do this out of Bridge using the Image Processor, or open the image in Photoshop and use the Image/Image Size dialog. Either way, you need to specify your image dimensions and choose the 'Resize' option, either in pixels or in inches and ppi. The advantage to using Image Size is you have some more options, and also because you can keep the image in Photoshop if you want to do something like 'output sharpening' to your final image.

Other programs such as Lightroom and DPP will let you do the resizing/resampling as well."


You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tim
Light Bringer
Avatar
51,010 posts
Likes: 372
Joined Nov 2004
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
     
Oct 25, 2011 19:10 |  #7

Just do it. FAQ here.


Professional wedding photographer, solution architect and general technical guy with multiple Amazon Web Services certifications.
Read all my FAQs (wedding, printing, lighting, books, etc)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ThatTeenPhotographer
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
290 posts
Joined Aug 2011
Location: Austin, Texas
     
Oct 25, 2011 19:18 |  #8

A noob, once again fails to use a basic search feature! Thank you all, I wouldn't even bother if I had already answered the same question like 60 times, that's what makes you guys great members of the board!


Facebook (external link)|flickr (external link)|Website (external link)
Rebel XSi (450D), 50mm 1.8 II, EF-S 18-55, Tamron AF 70-300 Di LD, CS6, Rebel 2000 & Access to Many Old Film Cameras
Working on a 365

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ThatTeenPhotographer
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
290 posts
Joined Aug 2011
Location: Austin, Texas
     
Oct 25, 2011 19:22 |  #9

But let me get this straight, my files saved at 72 ppi will print just as well as 300??? I was made to believe saving at 300 was significantly better than 72? All help has been appreciated. I'm certainly still learning the editing side of things.


Facebook (external link)|flickr (external link)|Website (external link)
Rebel XSi (450D), 50mm 1.8 II, EF-S 18-55, Tamron AF 70-300 Di LD, CS6, Rebel 2000 & Access to Many Old Film Cameras
Working on a 365

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tim
Light Bringer
Avatar
51,010 posts
Likes: 372
Joined Nov 2004
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
     
Oct 25, 2011 19:25 |  #10

No worries, i've only answered this question twice so far today...

ppi is irrelevant for most print shops. Just send them it at native camera size and tell them the size you want it. Some print shops will tell you to resize it yourself, and the ppi required, in which case you just plug those numbers into photoshop and let it do the job.

ppi is irrelevant for digital images, as there are no inches, just pixels.


Professional wedding photographer, solution architect and general technical guy with multiple Amazon Web Services certifications.
Read all my FAQs (wedding, printing, lighting, books, etc)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ThatTeenPhotographer
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
290 posts
Joined Aug 2011
Location: Austin, Texas
     
Oct 25, 2011 19:26 |  #11

tim wrote in post #13306411 (external link)
No worries, i've only answered this question twice so far today...

ppi is irrelevant for most print shops. Just send them it at native camera size and tell them the size you want it. Some print shops will tell you to resize it yourself, and the ppi required, in which case you just plug those numbers into photoshop and let it do the job.

ppi is irrelevant for digital images, as there are no inches, just pixels.

So should I even bother saving at 300?


Facebook (external link)|flickr (external link)|Website (external link)
Rebel XSi (450D), 50mm 1.8 II, EF-S 18-55, Tamron AF 70-300 Di LD, CS6, Rebel 2000 & Access to Many Old Film Cameras
Working on a 365

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tonylong
...winded
Avatar
54,657 posts
Gallery: 60 photos
Likes: 548
Joined Sep 2007
Location: Vancouver, WA USA
     
Oct 25, 2011 19:39 |  #12

Hmm, we've tried to answer this.

Try reading this thread from the FAQ:

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=83445


Tony
Two Canon cameras (5DC, 30D), three Canon lenses (24-105, 100-400, 100mm macro)
Tony Long Photos on PBase (external link)
Wildlife project pics here (external link), Biking Photog shoots here (external link), "Suburbia" project here (external link)! Mount St. Helens, Mount Hood pics here (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
44,882 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 3672
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
     
Oct 25, 2011 19:42 |  #13

tim wrote in post #13306411 (external link)
No worries, i've only answered this question twice so far today...

ppi is irrelevant for most print shops. Just send them it at native camera size and tell them the size you want it. Some print shops will tell you to resize it yourself, and the ppi required, in which case you just plug those numbers into photoshop and let it do the job.

ppi is irrelevant for digital images, as there are no inches, just pixels.

Tim you are confusing the guy by mixing DPI and PPI, just like Tony did!!!

Again, Tim should have written:

"No worries, i've only answered this question twice so far today...

DPI is irrelevant for most print shops. Just send them it at native camera size and tell them the size you want it. Some print shops will tell you to resize it yourself, and the ppi required, in which case you just plug those numbers into photoshop and let it do the job.

DPI is irrelevant for digital images, as there are no inches, just pixels."

PPI is a derived number, calculated simply as PPI = ( [Number of Pixels] / [the SIZE OF PRINT in inches] )
DPI is only applicable to offset printing (printing press), like newspapers and magazine illustrations, and does not apply to photographic enlargments.

The real problem is that a lot of software mixes up the two terms...for example, Photoshop has 'PPI' (e.g. '300 ppi') reference within its file output dialog window, but then embeds that information within the EXIF of the file as '300 DPI", imbecile programmers at Adobe!


You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tonylong
...winded
Avatar
54,657 posts
Gallery: 60 photos
Likes: 548
Joined Sep 2007
Location: Vancouver, WA USA
     
Oct 25, 2011 19:46 |  #14

That "DPI"/PPI figure you see is just a "tag" that has no real meaning -- your image will only have a real PPI value when you print to a specific size -- you devide the pixels by the inches. Photoshop can show you that value in the Image/Image Size dialog if you specify the dimensions in inches. Then you are free to resize/resample if you wish, as was stated before.

If you shoot in Raw, or open a jpeg/tiff/psd in Camera Raw, you can use the Camera Raw "conversion properties" to specify a ppi "tag" -- below the image preview in Camera Raw is a link that shows, among other things, the "tag" that Camera Raw will apply (by default I believe it's 240 ppi). Click that link and you can set whatever value you like -- it won't change anything about the actual image, it'll just put a number in the "tag" that will then show up if you view the image Exif.


Tony
Two Canon cameras (5DC, 30D), three Canon lenses (24-105, 100-400, 100mm macro)
Tony Long Photos on PBase (external link)
Wildlife project pics here (external link), Biking Photog shoots here (external link), "Suburbia" project here (external link)! Mount St. Helens, Mount Hood pics here (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
boerewors
Goldmember
Avatar
1,948 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Sep 2009
Location: South African living in Indonesia
     
Oct 25, 2011 19:57 |  #15

The PPI has no effect if you change it without resampling. You can have a 12 megapixel image @ 300 PPI and the same 12 megapixel image @ 72 DPI and its exactly the same thing.
The difference comes when you want to print. Depending on what size you want to print is how many DPI/PPI you will end up with. if you want to see the PPI at print size, you have to go to the resize tab in photoshop and make sure the resampling box is unticked. Then input your printing dimentions to find out what your PPI will be. I have printed as large as 24 inch width prints from as low as 200 PPI and could put my nose directly to the canvas, it still looks great.
If your friend teaches photoshop, i think he would know what to do in order to make a good print anyway. Maybe he should be the one to edit your RAW file.


The most important piece of gear you own, resides in your head and its called your brain.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

3,081 views & 0 likes for this thread
40 inch print, so many questions.
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Haxmaxx
793 guests, 229 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.