# Poster size photo?



## mustangman (Oct 23, 2006)

I am going to order from a place that changes the photo and makes into art for the wall. I think if this one comes out good will be all my christmas presents this year. Which one u like best?
It will look like this on canvas. 

 

 

 


Click on to see larger.


----------



## mysteryscribe (Oct 23, 2006)

DO you have a negative or a digital file???


----------



## mustangman (Oct 23, 2006)

It is a digital photo.


----------



## darich (Oct 23, 2006)

i decide the size i want then use photoshop to increase the image size to my poster size.
when you're increasing the size do it several smaller steps rather than one large step - the interpolation is better that way i believe.

i also put a border with an image title in the poster so the actual photo doesnn't need to be increased to the full size of the poster.

check the "purchase" section of my website to see what i mean.

the other factor that you'll need to remember is the size of the original will have a large bearing on how big you can print. the higher the resolution of the original then the larger the poster you can print.

I used a Canon Digital Rebel and then a  Canon 20D and regularly got prints 30inches by 20inches and the looked fine.
I've now upgraded my camera so if need be i could print largere again.


----------



## rmh159 (Oct 23, 2006)

I have a 5mp P&S and a D50 (6mp) and also have 20 x 30's of 2 shots I've done.  I cropped them in photoshop to fit that aspect ratio and unless I get REALLY close I don't notice any flaws... even close up they're not obvious.  I know there is a mathematical way to determine photo size based upon the cameras resolution but what's "ideal" vs. what looks fine at a normal distance differ in my opinion.  My suggestion would be to just take the chance with the money, get the print however big you want it and decide how good it looks.  If it looks like crap you'll know it.

I forget where I got mine blown up that big.  I'm not sure of any sites that do poster sizes though I'm sure others do if anyone can post some links.


----------



## Torus34 (Oct 24, 2006)

Is there any rule of thumb relating resolution to maximum acceptable print size?


----------



## Digital Matt (Oct 24, 2006)

Torus34 said:
			
		

> Is there any rule of thumb relating resolution to maximum acceptable print size?



It's all in the eye of the beholder.  I know some people who will not enlarge 6mp beyond 8x10, but I have printed 6mp at 20x30" and found it to be acceptable.


----------



## W.Smith (Oct 24, 2006)

Torus34 said:
			
		

> Is there any rule of thumb relating resolution to maximum acceptable print size?



The visual quality of a 300dpi print is considered to be on a par with a chemical photo print from a 35mm frame. I.o.w.: razorsharp at 8 inches viewing distance (for someone with 20/20 vision).

The 'maximum acceptable print size' is dependant on the criterion you set for it.
Do you need a poster to be razorsharp at 8 inches viewing distance? Then you need 300dpi. Know the poster's size? Then you can calculate how many pixels &#8211; width and height &#8211; your file needs to be:   _*H U G E*_  !

But I submit _nobody_ looks at/judges a poster from 8 inches viewing distance. So a 150dpi poster will very probably suffice.
Next time you see a billboard next to the road, get out of your car and walk up to it. You'll find you can easily distinguish the individual dots/pixels. I'd be surprised if it were much finer than 15 (yes, fifteen!) dpi!
Bottomline: it is the viewing distance &#8211; not the print size! &#8211; that determines the required resolution.


----------



## LaFoto (Oct 24, 2006)

Actually, I don't know anything about ratios and all this, but I had some of my pics taken in New York enlarged to (in cm) 30 x 40 (don't know how much that would be in inches) and they are fine (mailed them to a processing lab). I never worried about anything, just saved them at 12 - maximum after having put them through Photoshop, never even used USM back then, and they still came out really sharp. A 30 x 40 is not really-really POSTER size, but was the largest that service had on offer. 

And some of those photos had been taken with my little 5mb Powershot...!


----------



## rmh159 (Oct 24, 2006)

LaFoto said:
			
		

> ...enlarged to (in cm) 30 x 40 (don't know how much that would be in inches)


 
That's about 12 x 16 for us who use inches.

Does anyone know a site that prints out larger than sized shots?  I thought webshots used to but I don't think they go over 8 x 10 anymore.


----------



## Digital Matt (Oct 24, 2006)

Ez prints will do up to 20"x30".

www.ezprints.com


----------



## mustangman (Oct 24, 2006)

Doing some research online about enlarging to poster size I found a couple of sites that can modify the picture and make look like water color, oil painting etc.  They will even put on canvas and frame.  Anyone know about sites like that?  Any good?  This would be for a gift for mom so want it to be good.


----------



## TBaraki (Oct 24, 2006)

Digital Matt said:
			
		

> I know some people who will not enlarge 6mp beyond 8x10, but I have printed 6mp at 20x30" and found it to be acceptable.



I recently made some 8x10 prints from my 6MP D70.  I think I'd be extremely happy with the results from a significantly larger print.  How much larger?  That has yet to be tested.


----------



## W.Smith (Oct 25, 2006)

mustangman said:
			
		

> [...] a couple of sites that can modify the picture and make look like water color, oil painting etc.  They will even put on canvas and frame. [...]



You can do that modifying yourself. In Photoshop, or any of a dozen other editors. That way you keep as much control as possible over what it'll look like. And you can preview on-screen at home at your leisure! It's also cheaper. And you will then have reduced your worries to where and how you're gonna get it printed and framed. A simpler puzzle to solve, imho.
Unless you prefer to throw money at it, of course.

Don't print a 'watercolor' on canvas!






Cézanne?


----------



## mustangman (Oct 26, 2006)

I emailed the web site http://photofiddle.com/ to see if they can print water color print on canvas of a photo of my daughter. This is gift for my wife of our 2 year old daughter. They said that it is not really water colors but looks like it. I can also do it as oil painting or other style. Anyone know about this site?



			
				W.Smith said:
			
		

> You can do that modifying yourself. In Photoshop, or any of a dozen other editors. That way you keep as much control as possible over what it'll look like. And you can preview on-screen at home at your leisure! It's also cheaper. And you will then have reduced your worries to where and how you're gonna get it printed and framed. A simpler puzzle to solve, imho.
> Unless you prefer to throw money at it, of course.
> 
> Don't print a 'watercolor' on canvas!
> ...


----------



## uberben (Oct 26, 2006)

I use white house custum colour for all my photos including large prints. They do great work and the turnaround time is very fast. The link below is there pricing book.

http://www.whcc.com/pricing/whcc_2006_pricing_0906.pdf


----------



## W.Smith (Oct 28, 2006)

mustangman said:
			
		

> I emailed the web site http://photofiddle.com/ to see if they can print water color print on canvas of a photo of my daughter. This is gift for my wife of our 2 year old daughter. They said that it is not really water colors but looks like it. I can also do it as oil painting or other style. Anyone know about this site?



Real watercolor paintings are painted on PAPER!
So if you print a 'watercolor' on canvas it will look ridiculous!
Kind of like a car with an airplane's wings.
Canvas is painted on with oil or acrylic paint. NOT with watercolors! That is technically impossible.


----------



## mustangman (Oct 28, 2006)

Thanks for your information. I emailed http://photfiddle.com/ again based on what you told me. They did say it is not really watercolor just looks like it. Thankyou for all your davice i am pretty new to all this stuff.



			
				W.Smith said:
			
		

> Real watercolor paintings are painted on PAPER!
> So if you print a 'watercolor' on canvas it will look ridiculous!
> Kind of like a car with an airplane's wings.
> Canvas is painted on with oil or acrylic paint. NOT with watercolors! That is technically impossible.


----------



## mustangman (Oct 28, 2006)

Thanks for your suggestion.  I am looking into the company you recommended.  Looks great.  They even do the printing on canvas, that I am looking for.  The other place that I am looking at also frames the picture..  I am looking for this as a gift for my mom.
I also looked at the link to your website and your work looks incredible.

Link to my Yahoo group for cool and lesser know websites.
 


			
				uberben said:
			
		

> I use white house custum colour for all my photos including large prints. They do great work and the turnaround time is very fast. The link below is there pricing book.
> 
> http://www.whcc.com/pricing/whcc_2006_pricing_0906.pdf


----------



## W.Smith (Oct 29, 2006)

http://www.starfoto.nl/ are the guys that print anything up to billboard size and bigger if need be. Prices are comensurate, of course. So their customer base consists primarily of advertising agencies, graphic studios, and outdoor media production companies.
But if you've got the money, hey! they can do it.
Shame their website isn't in English.


----------



## ted_smith (Oct 31, 2006)

I have always been a traditional film photographer (35mm) but never really enlarged my pics beyond A4 size. I've always stook with film because I read that film can be enlarged better than digital pictures (yes, I realise the true massive enlargements are done using 4x5 but I am referring to 35mm specifically). But I'm confused because from what I have read in the last few months it seems that there is little difference with regards to enlargements between a 35mm negative and a 8MP digital photo. Is that true? 

If so, hypothetically speaking, if I were to buy say a 6 or 8 mega pixel digital camera is it true that I would have as much feedom with regard to enlargments as I have currently with my 35mm film? 

Thanks for any clarification you can give (I was going to start a new thread but I think it fits in well with this one?)

Ted


----------



## Digital Matt (Oct 31, 2006)

ted_smith said:
			
		

> If so, hypothetically speaking, if I were to buy say a 6 or 8 mega pixel digital camera is it true that I would have as much feedom with regard to enlargments as I have currently with my 35mm film?
> 
> Thanks for any clarification you can give (I was going to start a new thread but I think it fits in well with this one?)
> 
> Ted



Any topic like this is totally subjective.  There are going to be people who will laugh when you say 8mp rivals 35mm.  There are some that say digital is better than 35mm.  

You should look at some enlargements and compare for yourself.  Digital and Film have a different look.  Which one is better, is up to you.

To answer your question though, in my opinion, yes, 8mp photos can be enlarged to A4 and beyond with good results, when viewed from an appropriate distance.  (the same as with 35mm)


----------



## mustangman (Oct 31, 2006)

mustangman said:
			
		

> Thanks for your suggestion.  I am looking into the company you recommended.  Looks great.  They even do the printing on canvas, that I am looking for.  The other place that I am looking at also frames the picture..  I am looking for this as a gift for my mom.
> I also looked at the link to your website and your work looks incredible.
> 
> Link to my Yahoo group for cool and lesser know websites.


I went to this site the you recommended but I don't understand the language.


----------



## mustangman (Oct 31, 2006)

I have been playing around online with the photo I am looking to be made into a canvas picture.  Let me know which one you guys think is the best.  Or make a suggestion on a different design.
Pic 1
Pic 2
Pic 3
Pic 4


----------



## cal_gundert05 (Nov 1, 2006)

My fave was #3


----------



## W.Smith (Nov 1, 2006)

This one, but not on canvas...


----------



## mustangman (Nov 2, 2006)

W.Smith said:
			
		

> This one, but not on canvas...


What would you recommend it printed on?


----------



## Bubsie (Nov 11, 2006)

I like the photos and I think canvas is a good medium to print on.  I have recently used a company called www.canvasrus.com   I ordered a couple of days ago and its due to arrive next week.  My picture didnt have any artistic effects but I think they do all sorts of different things with your photo.   I will let you know what it is like when it turns up.


----------



## xfloggingkylex (Nov 12, 2006)

I like two and four


----------



## sallydance (Nov 12, 2006)

I like the First one.  I have been playing around on the site now.  http://photofiddle.com/ is really a neat idea.  I ordered one of my favorite photographs as a painting.


----------



## Garbz (Nov 12, 2006)

I think the quality of a resized digital print also largely depends on the resampler used. I experimented with different resizing filters, took a large picture, cropped it through the centre (to make it the equivalent of a 5mpx) and then had my dad print it on the A3 laser printer at work. I've never actually blown a 35mm picture to this size before so I can not compare there, but the Lanczos filter was by far the best (for this perticular photograph, there are exceptions). I do not know why photoshop does not have this filter. It is not like this algorithm is proprietary.

It was of course a little bit blurry but if you blow something up to mural size you won't stare at it from a few cm away anyway.


----------



## mustangman (Nov 15, 2006)

'


----------



## mustangman (Nov 23, 2006)

sallydance said:
			
		

> I like the First one. I have been playing around on the site now. http://photofiddle.com/ is really a neat idea. I ordered one of my favorite photographs as a painting.


Thanks


----------

