Do pixels matter? What 20" x 30" prints reveal.

Started Jun 14, 2013 | Discussions thread
Great Bustard
Forum ProPosts: 23,785
Like?
Don't believe it.
In reply to bronxbombers4, Jun 18, 2013

bronxbombers4 wrote:

LaszloBencze wrote:

All I can say is could tell apart 8MP from 20MP prints even on an 8x11 never mind 20x30!

Please come to my show. I'll meet you at the gallery. I will be interested in learning how you can tell them apart.

I will be in CA soon, but not hitting Sacramento, SF and Monterey are the closest I'll be.

I printed some crisp (looked perfect edge to edge at 100% view on monitor and were not shot at some f/16-f/22 diffraction limiting aperture) 8MP and 20MP shots and asked people to comment on the prints (without mentioning anything at all or hinting at why) and these were all fit onto legal size paper (it was a sharp somewhat glossy paper and printed on a printer that supports high PPI and I used all of the max settings). Some people right away asked why some of the duplicates I had printed were better, some noticed the sharpness difference after I mentioned that some were printed differently, a few I needed to mention what the difference was and then they were able to reliably pick them out, a couple people couldn't tell even after I told them and asked them to look again and again (I guess they had low density rods and cones or were far-sighted and not corrected, some people are a trace far-sighted and some people have much denser rods and cones than others, etc.) From what I recall about 50% noticed it quickly without any prodding, about 40% noticed it after various degrees of prodding and about 10% couldn't seem to see the difference no matter how hard they tried or for how long and they failed at all tests to pick the sharper ones out and only got random results.

I printed some 13x19" on my printer and I immediately noticed that my old 8MP shots didn't have that amazing extra detail my 5D2 shots had. Hahnemuhle PhotoRag Pearl on R3000 at highest settings for everything.

Up to here, I'm with you.

And for wildlife shots, it is easy to see the extra feather detail and such when I took a pic of a bird with a 7D and then a 5D2, the 7D pics clearly show more.

No, I'm afraid I don't buy that.  How is it that 18 MP 1.6x resolved more detail than 22 MP FF, unless, of course, you were framing wider with FF?  But if that was the case, then it would seem you would want to mention it, 'cause when we are talking about resolution of feather detail on a print, surely it's implied that we're talking about the same (or nearly the same) framing, unless we specifically state otherwise.

A 48MP FF would put a lot more detail on stuff when you are badly distance limited than an 8MP FF.

Just as 22 MP FF would put a lot more detail on stuff than 18 MP 1.6x, unless we were talking about using the same focal length on both FF and 1.6x, and then cropping the FF photo to the same framing as the 1.6x photo.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
auntNew
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow