Max printing sizes??

phil collins

phil collins

Messages
113
Edit My Images
Yes
Now this might sound a bit vague....but here goes.... I am currently using a 350D but will upgrading to 400D in the next couple of weeks, I am wondering with their respective pixel counts what is the max size I can reasonably print to and still retain clarity? Only asking as I fancy one of those large prints you can order online, bit of an ego boost for the lounge wall ;)

Any good suggestions or advice very welcome..
 
It depends, how far away will you be viewing the print from?

If you're holding it under your nose then you'll notice a drop in quality fairly quickly, stand a sensible distance and you can drop down to 100ppi quite happily so a 36" on the longest side viewed from a few feet will look just great :thumbs:
 
There is no maximum size.

As pxl8 noted, the distance from which you're looking at the picture is critical.

With a 350D you can make a 12"x8" print which is 300ppi and will look good really close up. If you go for 24"x16", it's only around 150ppi but you'll typically be looking at it from a few feet away and it will look good. At 48"x32" you've only got 75ppi, but you need to stand a fair way back to take it all in and from that distance it will again look good.

If you print out each pixel on a piece of paper a foot square, you can assemble them on a disused airfield and it will look brilliant on Google Earth. Though that would be a bit pricey. (And it wouldn't look very good close up.)
 
Thanks for the advice, much appreciated. It sounded like a dullard question but the answers have cleared it up I thank you all..:canon:
 
StewartR said:
If you print out each pixel on a piece of paper a foot square, you can assemble them on a disused airfield and it will look brilliant on Google Earth. Though that would be a bit pricey. (And it wouldn't look very good close up.)
Click to expand...

Oh my word. I want to do this.
 
I like the airfield idea - maybe we should all get together and do it for charity!
 
asab said:
I like the airfield idea - maybe we should all get together and do it for charity!
Click to expand...


I'd be up for that too, although getting the government to divert a satellite could be a challenge!:lol:

Massive shot of the Red arrows TBH
 
Now if every member of this forum could kindly print out 2000 sheets of A4 each...
 
I've printed from my old 350D at A3 without any problems, resized upto that in CS2, bobs yer uncle.

Alan
 
I've done plenty of A3 prints from 6Mp cameras. I'll usually upsize them in PS but have done some just using the "Scale to fit media" box in the printer driver. At normal viewing distance, either method works fine but if you're going to peer at them through a loupe, you'll see that the upsized ones are slightly better.
 
If you print out each pixel on a piece of paper a foot square, you can assemble them on a disused airfield and it will look brilliant on Google Earth. Though that would be a bit pricey. (And it wouldn't look very good close up.)
Click to expand...

:lol:

Thats amazing.
 
I have an 18x12 shot on my wall taken with a 6mp Canon D60 and its pin sharp so from a 400D no doubt you could easily do 24x16.in fact I did one the other day from my daughter 4mp Canon A80 at 10x8 and that's fine as well.I think its just a case of suck it and see
 
blancwall claim:

unique system then allows us to resize the images without the loss of detail.

either they'll make millions as they must have the worlds most advanced inter[polation system

or..

in reality ..

increasing the size of any image doesn't lose detail... it just moves it farther apart :-)
 
D300 with RAW 4288x2848

Just had a print from a same size jpeg done at 30 inches by 20 inches and it looks gorgeous.

Printer upscaled image.

Currently being framed.
 
Ah but did you make thesuggestion in 2006?:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top