to replace, or not to replace?

William M Porter

Hooray for me, I got my first order. I'm making enough money on it to, well, if I can find a twenty-five cent cup of coffee somewhere, I could buy a cup of coffee. But seriously, I'm pleased. And now I'm trying to figure out how to respond. Although I'm an old hand at digital photography and web publication, I'm new to SmugMug and fairly new to printing. I'm hoping someone can throw me a clue here.

The original files started life as 10.1 MP Raw (PEF) files, were tastefully post-processed in Lightroom, and then exported and downsized before being uploaded to my SmugMug site as 2000x1339 JPEGs. My customer has ordered 4"x6" prints. My question is, should I bother uploading larger versions of these images or not?

I've read Andy's sticky post on the subject, here. And I've tried to figure out the table of minimum sizes that he refers to. I'm afraid I find the table a bit hard to understand, as the column titled "Name" looks like it should be titled "Print Size", and I don't really understand the "old" vs "new" distinction. But as far as I can make out, it seems that my files already well exceed the minimums recommended.

I am also aware that he says that the table is a list of minimums, and I understand that, to some extent, more pixels than the minimum may be better. But again, I also suspect that there's a point beyond which more pixels simply means wasted bandwidth. For 4x6 prints, have I reached that point already if the source files to be printed are 2000x1339? I would be happy to upload replacements at, say, 3000x2010 (say) if it would matter. But if it won't matter, then I'd be happy to leave well enough alone.

Thanks in advance.

Will

ChuckWC

William M Porter wrote:

Hooray for me, I got my first order.
...
The original files started life as 10.1 MP Raw (PEF) files, were tastefully post-processed in Lightroom, and then exported and downsized before being uploaded to my SmugMug site as 2000x1339 JPEGs. My customer has ordered 4"x6" prints. My question is, should I bother uploading larger versions of these images or not?
...
I am also aware that he says that the table is a list of minimums, and I understand that, to some extent, more pixels than the minimum may be better. But again, I also suspect that there's a point beyond which more pixels simply means wasted bandwidth.
...
Thanks in advance.

Will

Congrats on your first order, always a nice feeling!

To answer your main question, for 4x6 prints, your files are big enough.

The general rule I use which has worked great for me is to use 300 ppi (pixels per inch). Anything over 300 ppi is a waste of bandwidth, as you said, since even the sharpest eyed person won't notice any difference beyond 300 ppi. Since your prints will be 4x6, that translates to a maximum needed of 1200x1800 pixels (you could use a lower ppi and most people wouldn't notice the difference in quality; I once tried 180 ppi and the prints looked great, but 300 ppi is an easy number to remember).

Your files are bigger than 1200x1800, but there's no need to shrink them; Smugmug (or more accurately EZPrints) will automatically use the pixels you have with great results.

By the way, if you were going to offer really big print sizes (like 20x30), there's no need to use 300 ppi at such large sizes. I myself use 200 ppi for such large sizes (for a final file size of 4000 x 6000), but based on what I've read here in the forums, that's probably over-kill (since apparently EZPrints will resize images as needed).

Since in my own gallery I offer prints from 5x7 to 20x30, I just put the large size files (4000x6000), which then works great for both small prints as well as the large prints.

Hope this helps!