Blowing a jpeg up.... how big..???

[CAB]

Have a couple of high quality Large Jpegs taken with a D300 (12.3 megapixle which i think equates to 4288x2848.

If i wanted to frame these how large could you make the prints?

Conversley if i was taking the pic's in RAW how much more larger could i make the prints?

Many thanks

CAB

[Felters]

It depends... will you be cropping them and then printing? Are they likely to be critically reviewed (exhibition?) Or are they family snaps? What shape/proportions do you want them to be?

All that said A4 would probably good quality and A3 would be acceptable for snapshots...

[SamHH]

Have a look at this:

http://www.bythom.com/printsizes.htm

I don't think using RAW will make any difference.

[nonplussed]

RAW will make no difference as the number of pixels is the same. The quality will be better as it's uncompressed, but it has no bearing on how large you can make the print. I'd have thought A3 should be allright?

[CAB]

SamHH said:

Have a look at this:

http://www.bythom.com/printsizes.htm

I don't think using RAW will make any difference.

Very useful - thanks. Was looking to mount the pic's (pretty much as they came out of the can bar a few corrections to account for some dust) and probably spend a fair amount doing so, as such the quality of the prints/pics has to got to make sense....

Was hoping to get to A2 but this doesn't look possible

Thanks CAB

[VxDuncan]

Quick calc would suggest ca. 4.5 x 3 foot should you want too. Typical exhibition graphics are printed at 80dpi and still look great as the larger the image the further away you are. I've printed images from the D300 couple of foot wide before, and would have no qualms about printing them twice as big.

[CAB]

VxDuncan said:

Quick calc would suggest ca. 4.5 x 3 foot should you want too. Typical exhibition graphics are printed at 80dpi and still look great as the larger the image the further away you are. I've printed images from the D300 couple of foot wide before, and would have no qualms about printing them twice as big.

Slightly more encouraging - thanks

CAB

[johnnywgk]

I might be being FICK, but, is there not a way one can use a PC screen?
Blow the piccy up and see what it looks like then.

Be gental with me, it was just an unejermacated thought.

[Simpo Two]

Felters said:

All that said A4 would probably good quality and A3 would be acceptable for snapshots...

I've had A3 prints from a 6Mp D70 and they look fine.

Rather than asking 'How big can I have it?' (to which the answer is 'any size you like') what print size do you actually want?

Edited by Simpo Two on Sunday 25th October 23:14

[AndWhyNot]

I've had prints off my 10mp D80 at 30" x 20" and they withstand scrutiny.

To get an idea for yourself, crop the image 1/5 away across and down and get it printed at 6" x 4" in moments, for pence.

[Bob_Defly]

Surely going back to my post about no. of pixels vs pixel size, you should be able to be print these pretty big, say 3 or 4 ft across. Thing is with large prints is that you stand further back when looking at them, so don't bother pixel peeping on your screen when you upsize them, don't worry about it.

I took some pics with my D300 and have had poster size prints done which were fine, I've also had some images used for billboard ads, which also looked great.

[ian in lancs]

I used my D300s a week or so ago in a studio that was demonstrating Lastolite studio lights so a perfect set up and the clothed fashion model was Wonderbra / Ultimo's Katie Green. So everything was perfect!

I shot RAW at 200 ISO with a 18-105mm Nikon VR lens at f/11. The computer they had couldn't handle the D300s RAW files so I had to convert in camera to jpeg. They gave us all a 24" x 30" print on an Epson large format poster printer. The full frame print is awesome and detailed - possible to see individual hairs, eye lashes etc. And that's from a 12Meg Camera and probably not the best lens for the situation.

[nick_bbb]

12mp, no problem...

[GetCarter]

Yea I sell 30" x 20" prints (from 12mp), nobody has ever complained. I have three that size on my wall.

[Whitefly Swatter]

I have had 4 meg pics from an Olympus C770 blown up to A1 (841x594 or 36x24 in old monies) and unless you have your nose toughing the photo you cannot tell its a low pixel count

The best advice (not given yet ?!) is try it and see

[ROADRUNNER3]

I've printed an image from a D300 to 40 x 60" using Genuine Fractals to resize, and printing at 150 dpi. The result was perfect. Let me know if I can help.

www.fluid-images.co.uk

Edited by ROADRUNNER3 on Monday 26th October 08:57

[CAB]

many thanks - Nick your pic was very convincing!

CAB

[DamianBlades]

I've quite happily printed in A0 before without loosing any quality.

[M-J-B]

The answer is completely subjective and depends on the image in question.

A fine macro portrait of a flower or insect may not look as good if you 'go large' as a landscape with the fine detail missing which will look perfectly fine.

We print massive images (up to 10m+ x 3m) and you juts have to bear in mind the larger an image, the further away you have to view it. As a rule of thumb, the best distance to view any image (as a minimum) is 1.5 x diagonal.

You should be able to look at a small portion of the image at full size on your screen and this will give you a pretty good idea how it's going to look. Don't also forget that should you print on canvas it will give you a bit if play as far as the eye is concerned rather than for example printing onto a glossy photo paper, or Opaljet.

[pmanson]

Tim/Guys,

I have a holiday snap that i'm keen to get blown up and put onto canvas...




The original image is 2560 x 1920 (72 dpi) and ideally we would like it printed 20" x 30"

Do you think this will be possible?

Cheers,
Phill