24''x36'' Print from Canon 20D

With the newer versions of photoshop, the 10% increment thing isn't needed as it does just as good a job straight off.

There was a comparison of resizing tools in the BJP magazine a few weeks back which found that CS2 did a good enough job.

Assuming you're in a location where you control the light source, the pace etc. and not chasing them all over the place. The best 2' X 3' picture you'll get for the least cost is not from a 1Ds and Epson printer but a 4X5 view camera and traditional film and paper.

Digital technology has its benefits over film. But doesn't make it right for every occassion.

I agree wilflee,,, I was thinking of buying the Eos 1D (17Mp) but I think a 4x5 film camera will give me better quality for portraits like these. Which medium format camera is the best?

Its entirely possible to create huge prints at very good quality.

Heres something i created not too long ago of a powershot G6. !!!!

https://photography-on-the.net …=59638&highligh​t=panorama

I have tested GF against Photoshop a few times and I find that it depends on the shot but usually Photoshop is King. no need to buy the GF. I have also found that the upsize in 10% increments is hardly any better than going all at once do a test for yourself and compare I think you'll agree.

If you want ultimate detail, doubling the number of pixels by going to the 1DsMk2 only increases resolution by a factor of 1.4x (the square root of 2). If you wanted to double the resolution, you would need to increase pixel count by 4 since each pixel would have to be replaced by 2 pixels horizontal and 2 pixels vertical. For really big enlargements there is no way that a 1DsMK2 can come any where close to a 4x5 inch camera.

However, for portraits, most people aren't interested in seeing the detail of every little flaw in their complexion. An extrapolated print from either a 20D or 1DsMK2 might produce all the detail they want to see. Both would certainly have more detail than a classic oil painting that many people are happy with.

For extrapolating I don't use either Genuine Fractals or PhotoShop bicubic. I have found I get better results with Qimage using their Pyramid method. This method uses a lot of computer processing, so be prepared to wait while your computer crunches the numbers.

A different perspective you may like to consider. If you are going to print a print this large, then you are going to want to project as high a quality image onto the sensor of the 20D as you can. I have no experience of the lens you mention, but is it up to the job that you are going to ask of it? You may wish to consider, for this special assignment, using a prime.
Hope this hasn't muddied the waters too much.
Gary

Is prime much better than a good zoom L?

From photozone, http://www.photozone.d​e (Reviews, user performance surveys, EOS lenses).

Lens Optical verdict (max 5)
Canon EF 24-70L f2.8 usm 4.26
Canon EF 70-200 f2.8 usm 4.69
Canon EF 70-200 f4 usm 4.59
Tamron AF 28-75 f2.8 SP XR Di 3.43
Canon EF 50 f1.4 usm 4.37
Canon 50 f1.8 II 3.85
Canon 85 f1.8 usm 4.51

Better? that's up to you to decide, but it seems that some reasonably priced primes can perform as well as or better than "L" zooms which are much more expensive.
Gary

Hi there.. I'm total newb.. in fact i haven't even got my camera shipped to me yet but this was the exact pic I was thinking of taking once my 350D arrives.. Comes out great.. Actually I was going to take the pic from the other side of the river.. Or wait for the Casino flames going on.. well done on the pic!