BIG print from 16MP m43

yanisha wrote:

Boss of Sony wrote:

d3xmeister wrote:

Here’s the photo:

Nice photo. Where is this? I want to live in a city like this.

Looks like Budapest.

Yes, looks like the Buda side there, with the Fishermens Ramparts in front of that cathedral spire. Was there in 1983.

Regards.... Guy

d3xmeister wrote:

jwilliams wrote:

pic. Printing on canvas allows one to go a lot bigger than one would with the same file on regular paper. I use canvas a lot lately, especially for people where resolution is not very important. It also can give a sort of painterly effect to the print that works well for portraits.

That’s ok because I prefer canvas for big prints anyway, I like that painterly effect. I never really liked big prints on photo or regular paper. Basically it looks like a highly detailed painting, and I love the colors.

I recently made three really big prints (same size effectively as yours) on canvas from a medium format film scan, a 16MP m43 file, and an iPhone 6s 12MP 1/3” sensor.

They all look good, and do their job. At typical viewing distances it is impossible to discern any difference in origin.

What conclusions can be drawn from this regarding canvas prints or sensor performance I leave to others.

Okapi001 wrote:

Ab Latchin wrote:

As I run a studio I am printing all the time from tonnes of cameras old and new. There is more different in the choice of print tech than the camera tech at most normal sizes.

Of course as you print bigger more resolution helps, but this really kicks in in the 30" x 40" mark with close inspection, and we are talking about needs 36 mp and up to see a real difference.

A lot of that is due to how papers and printing actually robs resolution in the process.

I have a 30" x 40" print on my living room wall from an EM5.2 shot at night in london, it looks great!

So what would be the best way to print large, if you want to see the smallest details? On a paper, acryl, metal ...? And what resolution can be achieved - is there a way to print higher than 300 dpi? Let's say I would like to have a 30" x 40", with the best possible resolution. What would you recommend?

The resolution that can be achieved is dependent on output size. But as I mentioned, up to around 30"40" your process and production technique matters more. So if you are on an old Komori press at 150 lines vs a newer Heidelberg at 200 or more lines. But even if you go on a nicer press but have a pressman who doesn't register properly, or you choose an uncoated stock etc. They all have a large impact on your output.

The simple truth is, if you are after resolution go for high gloss papers and a the highest density output you have available (modern inkjets are good but high screen dithered presses are better) but you must sharpen at your output size.

Too many people are sharpening at full resolution and letting their printer or production software downsample their imagery. You have to resize the dimensions for the output at the DPI of the output you are choosing. Then you take a sharpening step, on a non 4K monitor you can use a trick of viewing at about 60-70% and sharpening until you can just see the "bite" but watching for halos.

If you are sharpening very high frequency detail (grass, hair fabric etc.) use a low px radius and if you are sharpening after an enlargement and want to bring back some bite a slightly higher radius.

But people can't shoot 40mp pictures and print on a cotton rag and expect pixel level detail, in fact on most uncoated or mat stocks you will be losing most of your resolution.

Anyways, if you want resolution sharpen for output and speak to your production about the exact specifications for your machine and prepare your files to that output.

BTW, the same thing goes for screen, the best photographers sharing their work online are downsizing for screens and sharpening for output. It makes many people think their "gear" is incredible, even at small output sizes.

It is Budapest, in 2014. I was there for the Formula 1 event. It’s a beautiful place.

Isacas wrote:

I have printed on canvas at that same size using by Em5ii with no issues. If you look very closely to at an oil painting, you will see the brush strokes. Big pictures are not meant to be inspected, but seen from a sensible distance.

Why not both? Big picture with small details to discover sounds goid to me. Why would anyone dictate how I should view the picture.

Glad that you are happy with your result as I am with mine.

Ab Latchin wrote:

Okapi001 wrote:

So what would be the best way to print large, .... What would you recommend?

The resolution that can be achieved is dependent on output size. ...

BTW, the same thing goes for screen, the best photographers sharing their work online are downsizing for screens and sharpening for output. It makes many people think their "gear" is incredible, even at small output sizes.

Thanks for that succinct reply to Okapi001's post.

Jonas Palm wrote:

d3xmeister wrote:

jwilliams wrote:

pic. Printing on canvas allows one to go a lot bigger than one would with the same file on regular paper. I use canvas a lot lately, especially for people where resolution is not very important. It also can give a sort of painterly effect to the print that works well for portraits.

That’s ok because I prefer canvas for big prints anyway, I like that painterly effect. I never really liked big prints on photo or regular paper. Basically it looks like a highly detailed painting, and I love the colors.

I recently made three really big prints (same size effectively as yours) on canvas from a medium format film scan, a 16MP m43 file, and an iPhone 6s 12MP 1/3” sensor.

They all look good, and do their job. At typical viewing distances it is impossible to discern any difference in origin.

What conclusions can be drawn from this regarding canvas prints or sensor performance I leave to others.

has much less resolution than traditional photo paper.  Linearly I would say 1/2 or less.  So something that might max out with a 8x10 on traditional paper could be printed easily at 16x20 on Canvas or maybe even larger.