You can also bring it to a commercial service (Fuji spring to mind) that can print out almost any size. They use photographic process, ie, the electronically photograph your pic, and then develop it/print. I've seen some amazing results.
Fuji Frontier systems use an optical printing system which emulates ~600dpi quality, from a 300dpi file.
- Scott http://framebyframe.ca [Bodies] Canon EOS 20D - Canon EOS 500 [Lenses] Sigma APO 70-200 f/2.8 - Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 - Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 - Tamron XR Di 28-75mm f/2.8 - Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6
[Flash] Sigma EF500 Super DG Flash
[Tripod] Manfrotto 055 Pro Black
[Head] 484RC2, 200RC2
This not totally related to the above. How do I reduce the size of my image to post it without losing image quality for viewing? 150k or 800 max one side. It seems to be a trial and error method in photoshop and in digital photo pro. Any help will be appreciated.
Thanks, Glenn
i do that so frequently that i've reassigned my F1 key to "save for web."
i must say, this thread is AWESOME! thanks for all the great info, guys!
No tricks to that one ;-) it all depends on how big you print it.
if you have an image 3072x2048 and you print it without cropping at 300 ppi (pixels per inch) then the image would be:
3072 / 300 = 10.24 inches
2048 / 300 = 6.82 inches
if you print it at 30x20 inches then you would wind up with a ppi of:
3072 / 30 = 102.4 ppi
2048 / 20 = 102.4 ppi
Remember that ppi, or pixels per inch is not the same thing as dpi, or dots per inch when it comes to inkjet printers. Each pixel of the image printed on an inkjet printer is made of multiple "dots". The terms ppi and dpi are used quite often interchangeably, but for accuracy when dealing with math, I like to separate their meanings.
The Terminology for dpi is taken from the printing industry and indicates the number of lines per inch, vertical and horizontal, that an offset press can print and still keep the resulting dot structure open. Most good presses are capable of 200-250 dpi. When you see a poster in a bus stop Or your favorite photog magazine, for example, it is likely that it was printed on an offset press at 200-250 dpi. Even a good sharp 4 color halftone at 150 dpi looks good. An Inkjet, on the other hand, can print a much smaller dot size and so it can print more of those small dots to the inch than the offset process. Your ink jet is not looking at your native file resolution but rather it takes the available pixel count and and breaks it down into much smaller dot sizes. That means that a native file which is simply upsized by reducing the pixel count to as low as 150 ppi should print well on a good ink jet.
Now I have a question for Mr. Stephens if he's still with this thread. What does a fellow with a D70 or any decent 6mp camera do with a publication that demands that you submit an 11x17 inch spread at 300dpi. How can this poor guy (or anyone short of a full frame camera) do that without interpolating up to an excess and resulting in loss of sharpness and "blockiness"?
Now I have a question for Mr. Stephens if he's still with this thread. What does a fellow with a D70 or any decent 6mp camera do with a publication that demands that you submit an 11x17 inch spread at 300dpi. How can this poor guy (or anyone short of a full frame camera) do that without interpolating up to an excess and resulting in loss of sharpness and "blockiness"?
Thanks Bob
Bob,
I bet you already have a clue to your own answer. The short answer is that interpolation, by itself, does not increase actual detail. If the requirements are "11x17 inch spread at 300dpi", then you need an imager capable of that native resolution.
Of course, depending on the publication and the nature of "your" image, the publishers might be more flexible for true, once-in-a-lifetime type images.
If a full two-page spread in one of the leading publications is your goal, I suggest you need to invest in equipment that publication deems worthy of the process.
The least expensive method is film based and then drum scan, at least from an initial purchase perspective. Ultimately processing and scanning fees will drive you broke, but there is something truly special about a good large format view camera, a great set of lenses and transparency film.
I bet you already have a clue to your own answer. The short answer is that interpolation, by itself, does not increase actual detail. If the requirements are "11x17 inch spread at 300dpi", then you need an imager capable of that native resolution.
Of course, depending on the publication and the nature of "your" image, the publishers might be more flexible for true, once-in-a-lifetime type images.
If a full two-page spread in one of the leading publications is your goal, I suggest you need to invest in equipment that publication deems worthy of the process.
The least expensive method is film based and then drum scan, at least from an initial purchase perspective. Ultimately processing and scanning fees will drive you broke, but there is something truly special about a good large format view camera, a great set of lenses and transparency film.
Hi Ziggy, actually you are right; I do have a clue to my own answer. I just wanted to see what solutions someone else might come up with.
The senario I mentioned here is not my problem, but a hypethetical one based on a photo contest run by a Canadian photo mag. I have 8,000,000 wonderful pixels on a Full Frame Transfer nMos CCD and even that would not have met the requirements had I chosen to enter the contest. As it was, I was so digusted with the ridiculous requirements that virtually guaranteed that nobody except the "Pro's" could enter that I declined to even try.
Does it say that these need to me native, original pixels?
11 x 300 = 3300
17 x 300 = 5100
3300 x 5100 = 16,830,000 Pixels
This means that even a 1DsMkll with 4992 x 3328 pixels = 16,613,376 pixels cannot submit a file large enough... And yet, numerous pro photographers routinely create 24 x 36 in lustrous prints from this camera that rival 2 1/4 sq inch film cameras. (The 2 1/4 film market is dying due to digital photography, and these are not 2 1/4 digital film backs that are killing film, but 35mm and APS sensored DSLRs.)
I would just uprez with Genuine Fractals, or Blow Up or any of the other uprzzing programs available if it were me.
I have many images printed at 16 x 20 inches on an Epson 4000 inkjet printer that put doublepage offset printed magazine spreads into the ditch.
Fuji Frontier systems use an optical printing system which emulates ~600dpi quality, from a 300dpi file.
The file should be 300 Pixels per Inch - that willl easily print at 1400 dots per inc on on Epson wide bed printer like the Epson 4800, or several others. But for prints not viewed closer than 2 or 3 feet, they can be easily be printed at 200 pixels per inch.
I understand what Bob was asking about the 300 dpi for submission to publications. Most of the magazines that've printed my pictures have asked for 300 dpi files.
I think it's silly to rezz up to 300 dpi creating a 30 MB file which I then have to resize down and send.
So, what's the "easier" way to get a 300 dpi file sent to them? Most e-mails won't take attachments over 10MB.
I understand what Bob was asking about the 300 dpi for submission to publications. Most of the magazines that've printed my pictures have asked for 300 dpi files.
I think it's silly to rezz up to 300 dpi creating a 30 MB file which I then have to resize down and send.
So, what's the "easier" way to get a 300 dpi file sent to them? Most e-mails won't take attachments over 10MB.
The "easiest" of all is to post the file on a site like SmugMug.com, and then provide a link to the photo so that they can download from the site.
Each publication and/or contest has its own set of rules for submissions. You really have to research "their" preferences and methodology prior to any submissions.
Comments
change image size to 640 x 480 pixels, apply; then select jpeg quality to give you the needed file size; then save.
Thanks, got it.
Fuji Frontier systems use an optical printing system which emulates ~600dpi quality, from a 300dpi file.
http://framebyframe.ca
[Bodies] Canon EOS 20D - Canon EOS 500
[Lenses] Sigma APO 70-200 f/2.8 - Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 - Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 - Tamron XR Di 28-75mm f/2.8 - Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6
[Flash] Sigma EF500 Super DG Flash
[Tripod] Manfrotto 055 Pro Black
[Head] 484RC2, 200RC2
i do that so frequently that i've reassigned my F1 key to "save for web."
i must say, this thread is AWESOME! thanks for all the great info, guys!
The Terminology for dpi is taken from the printing industry and indicates the number of lines per inch, vertical and horizontal, that an offset press can print and still keep the resulting dot structure open. Most good presses are capable of 200-250 dpi. When you see a poster in a bus stop Or your favorite photog magazine, for example, it is likely that it was printed on an offset press at 200-250 dpi. Even a good sharp 4 color halftone at 150 dpi looks good. An Inkjet, on the other hand, can print a much smaller dot size and so it can print more of those small dots to the inch than the offset process. Your ink jet is not looking at your native file resolution but rather it takes the available pixel count and and breaks it down into much smaller dot sizes. That means that a native file which is simply upsized by reducing the pixel count to as low as 150 ppi should print well on a good ink jet.
Now I have a question for Mr. Stephens if he's still with this thread. What does a fellow with a D70 or any decent 6mp camera do with a publication that demands that you submit an 11x17 inch spread at 300dpi. How can this poor guy (or anyone short of a full frame camera) do that without interpolating up to an excess and resulting in loss of sharpness and "blockiness"?
Thanks
Bob
Bob,
I bet you already have a clue to your own answer. The short answer is that interpolation, by itself, does not increase actual detail. If the requirements are "11x17 inch spread at 300dpi", then you need an imager capable of that native resolution.
Of course, depending on the publication and the nature of "your" image, the publishers might be more flexible for true, once-in-a-lifetime type images.
If a full two-page spread in one of the leading publications is your goal, I suggest you need to invest in equipment that publication deems worthy of the process.
The least expensive method is film based and then drum scan, at least from an initial purchase perspective. Ultimately processing and scanning fees will drive you broke, but there is something truly special about a good large format view camera, a great set of lenses and transparency film.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
Hi Ziggy, actually you are right; I do have a clue to my own answer. I just wanted to see what solutions someone else might come up with.
The senario I mentioned here is not my problem, but a hypethetical one based on a photo contest run by a Canadian photo mag. I have 8,000,000 wonderful pixels on a Full Frame Transfer nMos CCD and even that would not have met the requirements had I chosen to enter the contest. As it was, I was so digusted with the ridiculous requirements that virtually guaranteed that nobody except the "Pro's" could enter that I declined to even try.
Thanks
Bob
11 x 300 = 3300
17 x 300 = 5100
3300 x 5100 = 16,830,000 Pixels
This means that even a 1DsMkll with 4992 x 3328 pixels = 16,613,376 pixels cannot submit a file large enough...
I would just uprez with Genuine Fractals, or Blow Up or any of the other uprzzing programs available if it were me.
I have many images printed at 16 x 20 inches on an Epson 4000 inkjet printer that put doublepage offset printed magazine spreads into the ditch.
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
The file should be 300 Pixels per Inch - that willl easily print at 1400 dots per inc on on Epson wide bed printer like the Epson 4800, or several others. But for prints not viewed closer than 2 or 3 feet, they can be easily be printed at 200 pixels per inch.
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
I think it's silly to rezz up to 300 dpi creating a 30 MB file which I then have to resize down and send.
So, what's the "easier" way to get a 300 dpi file sent to them? Most e-mails won't take attachments over 10MB.
SmugMug Support Specialist - www.help.smugmug.com
http://www.phyxiusphotos.com
Equine Photography in Maryland - Dressage, Eventing, Hunters, Jumpers
The "easiest" of all is to post the file on a site like SmugMug.com, and then provide a link to the photo so that they can download from the site.
Each publication and/or contest has its own set of rules for submissions. You really have to research "their" preferences and methodology prior to any submissions.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums