Uprezzing for large prints no longer necessary?

Hi all,

I was wondering whether it still is necessary to upres a processed image for printing in large format, say 24"X 36" or even larger.

The reason I am not sure anymore is that I had a fairly long talk with a Canon employee, who was operating a few Canon large format printers at an exhibition. and who said that the interpolation used by the actual printers is much better than you can achieve by doing it yourself, bicubic or otherwise, even more so because the printer has in-built software optimized specifically for that printer to do so. IOW, just upload your standard maximum size processed image files, same pixel size as the camera provides, and the printer takes care of any uprezzing required for the picture size you want it to print.

The printers demonstrated were the Canon IPF 6100, and IPF 9100 (impressive pieces of machinery for sure, wish I could afford one, either one ).

So, I would appreciate it if you would explain what your take is on this, and why?

Thank you very much in advance!

Kind regards, Wim

I've seen that quoted other places, too. So far I haven't had to uprez, so I can't say for myself.

It may be true, but I still prefer to upsample myself, so I have precise control over sharpening.

Unless someone I trust does a review/test, I prefer to do the upsizing myself, with final sharpening. On my Epson I upsize to 360. Traditionally, printers have not done the best job of upsizing.

The Pro lab I send to (uses Noritsu), once in awhile, wants the images

> Smaller sizes : 400 dpi (up to 12x18)
> Larger sizes: 300 dpi (12x20 until 24x36)
> Banner:150 dpi (bigger then 24x36)

wimg wrote in post #7524617
who said that the interpolation used by the actual printers is much better than you can achieve by doing it yourself, bicubic or otherwise, even more so because the printer has in-built software optimized specifically for that printer to do so.

Might be true, but I'll believe it when I see it. Not before.
Would be nice to run a test like this: Link

Thank you all for your comments!

PhotosGuy wrote in post #7525056
I've seen that quoted other places, too. So far I haven't had to uprez, so I can't say for myself.

I even do for A4 prints currently, to optimize for printer output of specific printers. This seems to give better results on my non-professional printers so far.

Damo77 wrote in post #7525110
It may be true, but I still prefer to upsample myself, so I have precise control over sharpening.

Yes, this is why I do this too.

bohdank wrote in post #7527027
Unless someone I trust does a review/test, I prefer to do the upsizing myself, with final sharpening. On my Epson I upsize to 360. Traditionally, printers have not done the best job of upsizing.

The Pro lab I send to (uses Noritsu), once in awhile, wants the images

> Smaller sizes : 400 dpi (up to 12x18)
> Larger sizes: 300 dpi (12x20 until 24x36)
> Banner:150 dpi (bigger then 24x36)

As mentioned above, I'll uprez to the actual printer dpi, if possible. When having images printed, I always like to check the printer resolution, and fit the image resolution to the printer, so I guess that is very similar. I do this for work printed elsewhere too.

René Damkot wrote in post #7527632
Might be true, but I'll believe it when I see it. Not before.
Would be nice to run a test like this: Link

I was aware of Qimage, but had forgotten about it, but it is exactly why I do what I do. I think I'll give it a go, testing this, and see if I can get Canon to do something similar (or create a massive 24"X 36" at 1200 dpi output file ).

Kind regards, Wim

I print on a Canon IPF8100, and generally find no difference in "uprezzing" from the original source file.
The printer is intelligent, with oustanding quality, but it doesn't do magic.
Canon's propriety software "Poster Artist" for this series of printers does a wonderful job with whatever algorithms were required to upsize some simple images, such as Clip-art, but it simply can not replace information that simply isn't there.

One of my last projects was printing a zillion-megabyte Tiff file from the Library of Congress for a 44"W x 144"H printout.
Out of curiosity, I converted it to jpeg and reprinted the same. Didn't see any real difference, but sure had fun wasting all that photo paper in the process.

How does that compare against doing it in PS?