# Possible to Print 8x10 from 768×1024 file?



## calderp (Jan 26, 2009)

So in a very, very unfortunate turn of events, a stolen camera and broken computer caused me to lose all of my photos from a study abroad trip. The only copies I now have are images that I uploaded to Google Images, which are very low resolution. I have 2 images I would really like to submit to a photo contest at my school, but I'm afraid the files I have are too low res to work as the prints need to be 8x10. Is there any way to make a viewable 8x10 print out of a file that is only 768x1024, or am I totally screwed? The contest is relatively low-key so I still have a chance even if the image doesn't look sharp, but if it's totally pixelated it won't be worth submitting...
Is there anything I can do with photoshop/paintshop pro, or a similar program to try and make this work?

 Images can be found here. If anyone is feeling generous and wants to try and sharpen then for me, or do whatever it is that might help (if anything might) feel free to modify them.
Picasa Web Albums - Paul - Beijing and M...
and here:
Picasa Web Albums - Paul - Beijing and M...


----------



## Big Mike (Jan 26, 2009)

What software do you have?
You might be able to up-size them with photoshop etc.  

In Photoshop, first crop to an 8x10 ratio, then go to the image size dialog box and increase the size/resolution.  I'd try inputting 8 x 10 inches at 240 pixels per inch (1920 x 2400)...make sure to use the 'bicubic smother' option.  Then sharpen it a little bit afterward.

b.t.w. That 2nd shot with the motorbike is a great shot.


----------



## stsinner (Jan 26, 2009)

Hey Mike, regarding what you wrote-is there a way to officially crop to 8X10 ratio, or are you just saying to make the pictures tall and skinny?  I'm familiar with the image sizing, but with cropping, can you tell photoshop that you want an approximate 8X10 ratio?


----------



## Big Mike (Jan 26, 2009)

> Hey Mike, regarding what you wrote-is there a way to officially crop to 8X10 ratio, or are you just saying to make the pictures tall and skinny? I'm familiar with the image sizing, but with cropping, can you tell photoshop that you want an approximate 8X10 ratio?


Absolutely.  The crop tool.

When you click on the crop tool, you will have fields in the option menu/bar (usually at the top of the window)  You can enter in what width and height you want and the crop tool with then constrain to that ratio.  You can also enter a resolution so that when it crops, it also resizes the image.  There is also a pull down menu of presets with common sizes, for example, 8x10 @ 300 PPI.  
If I'm going to make an 8x10 print from an image, I will often use the crop tool and either pick or enter those setting.  
Just make sure to save the cropped image as a copy and don't overwrite your original image.


----------



## TheUndisputed (Jan 26, 2009)

The answer to this question is really at what print resolution do you want to print. At a print resolution, let's use 72dpi for example, it would print an image 10 inches wide by 14 inches high. The quality of the image at 72dpi would be horrible, though.

My camera shoots at 240dpi. The minimum I would ever suggest using for print would be about 160 dots per inch, and that would set your actual picture resolution at 1707 x 2277. At the standard 240dpi, it would be 2560 x 3413.

Everything I print, I print at 300dpi to make sure the quality of the print is super fine. The higher the print resolution, the sharper your image. If you printed a 768 x 1024 image at 300dpi, it would only be 2.56" wide x 3.41 inches tall.

So it really comes down to how clear you want the image to appear when it is printed. I would strongly discourage printing a 768 x 1024 at an 8" x 10" print size. It will just come out blurry and nasty. To get the print size you want out of that image, it would have to be printed at a crappy 102.4dpi. It really wouldn't show anyoe what you are capable of. It would look all pixelated and hazy like you either have a crappy camera or you don't know how to use it.


----------



## Big Mike (Jan 26, 2009)

> My camera shoots at 240dpi


DPI (dots per inch) is a printer function and shouldn't factor into this.
PPI (Pixels per inch) is a more accurate term but the two are mixed up so often that they are almost synonymous.  

Camera's don't shoot images at a specific PPI number....it's just a reference to tell the computer how large to display the image on the monitor.  72, 240 & 300 are common default values...but you can change the PPI of a digital file to anything you want, without changing anything but the size it's displayed on the monitor.  (of course, if you change the PPI and choose to 'resample' then you might be altering the image by adding or reducing the number of actual pixels)

The D60 shoots at 3872 x 2592 pixels...that's the important thing to know.


----------



## AdamBomb (Jan 26, 2009)

To Print, you want a resolution of about 300 DPI. In order to do that, AND make it an 8x10, the Picture needs to be resampled. Here's the one that I did, I think it would print as an 8x10 and look just fine. 

Very nice shot BTW! 

This IS an 8x10 at 300 DPI:

CLICK TO DOWNLOAD!


----------



## stsinner (Jan 26, 2009)

Big Mike said:


> Absolutely.  The crop tool.




That's great!  I have cropped a million times, but I've never paid any attention that bar at the top!  It was neat how it allowed me to make an 8X10 box, and then, which I never knew, allowed me to move the crop box around on the picture..  Before, if I missed getting the crop in the right place, I'd ESC out and try the box again..  What a time saver!  Another very beneficial tidbit I've learned today.


----------



## rufus5150 (Jan 26, 2009)

> In Photoshop, first crop to an 8x10 ratio, then go to the image size dialog box and increase the size/resolution. I'd try inputting 8 x 10 inches at 240 pixels per inch (1920 x 2400)...make sure to use the 'bicubic smother' option.



At the direction of Scott Kelby (in his photoshop cs3 for digital photographers book), I started using the bicubic sharpener (which says it's best for reductions) to do enlargements. I've doubled photos (though not from this small of resolution) to great effect with no additional sharpening needed.

Worth a shot. I was shocked at the method myself until I saw it work.


----------



## TheUndisputed (Jan 26, 2009)

Big Mike said:


> DPI (dots per inch) is a printer function and shouldn't factor into this.
> PPI (Pixels per inch) is a more accurate term but the two are mixed up so often that they are almost synonymous.
> 
> Camera's don't shoot images at a specific PPI number....it's just a reference to tell the computer how large to display the image on the monitor.  72, 240 & 300 are common default values...but you can change the PPI of a digital file to anything you want, without changing anything but the size it's displayed on the monitor.  (of course, if you change the PPI and choose to 'resample' then you might be altering the image by adding or reducing the number of actual pixels)
> ...




Right, but the DPI is pre-determined before the image is loaded into photoshop. And you are correct about viewing on LCD and talking directly with the image, dpi has nothing to do with it. However, is is talking about _*printing*_ his image, where DPI plays a *major* role.


onONE makes a plug-in for photoshop called "Geniune Fractals 6," that I use on a daily basis. Being that I am a graphic designer, and many things just aren't at the resolution I need them at when they get to me, I have to be able to scale up while preserving the content of the image. GF6 allows you to scale to 1000x the original image size before it starts pixelating or blurring the content. I would recommend looking into that software if you are scaling a lot of medium for print. The only downside is, it isn't cheap. It's a $300.00 plug-in, so if you want it, make sure you really want it first. 

http://www.ononesoftware.com/detail.php?prodLine_id=7


----------



## ann (Jan 26, 2009)

i was going to suggest Genuine Fractals, perhaps you know someone who has that plug in and could make an enlarged copy for you.


----------



## Big Mike (Jan 26, 2009)

> Right, but the DPI is pre-determined before the image is loaded into photoshop. And you are correct about viewing on LCD and talking directly with the image, dpi has nothing to do with it. However, is is talking about printing his image, where DPI plays a major role.


My point is that image *A* 2400x3000 @ 72 PPI is the same quality as image *B* 2400x3000 @300 PPI.  The difference is that image *B* will be much larger on a computer screen  (in photoshop, only the magnification factor changes).  

When you send the file to the printer, it uses those 2400x3000 pixels to figure out how many dots of ink (DPI) to lay down on the paper.  It should disregard the PPI number.  

I know that some printers/print drivers don't disregard this number and take the screen size to be the desired print size...which is why it's still a good idea to set your PPI to 300 or whatever you are comfortable with...240 PPI etc.  

Yes, Genuine Fractals is probably the best option for up-sampling images.  I read somewhere that Photoshop's resizing algorithms have been improved quite a bit (over what they used several years ago)....so the difference between G.F. and Photoshop isn't a big as it used to be...and many people don't bother with the expense of G.F. anymore (although I think it's a lot cheaper than it used to be).


----------



## TamiyaGuy (Jan 26, 2009)

Well, I've printed a few images of crops that were about 1200 x 800 at A4 size and, while if you look _really_ close, you can see pixels, for general viewing from half a meter or so it's fine. In my opinion, it should look ok if you print it at that resolution.


----------



## TheUndisputed (Jan 26, 2009)

Big Mike said:


> My point is that image *A* 2400x3000 @ 72 PPI is the same quality as image *B* 2400x3000 @300 PPI.  The difference is that image *B* will be much larger on a computer screen  (in photoshop, only the magnification factor changes).
> 
> When you send the file to the printer, it uses those 2400x3000 pixels to figure out how many dots of ink (DPI) to lay down on the paper. It should disregard the PPI number.
> 
> ...



You do realize that PPI and DPI are treated in the same respect as far as a printer is concerned, right? Let me explain.

Photoshop reads in Pixels per inch, not Dots per inch. However, when I do work for people, My works are always set to 300pixels/inch. The reason for this is printers remark. Printers recommend that they are set to 300ppi for a direct conversion to print resolution. Now, the size comparison you are giving, is in accurate. Dots vary, pixels dont. So in some cases, a 300dpi image at 2400x3200 can and sometimes will appear almost identicle in size as a 300ppi image on a computer screan, depending on how much ink is used in the print.

This is why I gave them the same description. As far as a photoshop user is concerned, PPI and DPI when preparing for print should be treated as one and the same. Even you stated yourself they are synonymous. Unless you are using for web use, the difference between DPI and PPI won't mean a thing to you. Submitting an image a 300ppi to a printer is as close as you can get to 300dpi, and even still a 300ppi image prints clearer than a 72ppi image does. There is no denying that. Saying otherwise is like trying to tell me that a 1080p television does not emit a sharper picture than a 480p TV. Same principle. A Television works on Pixels per inch, and the higher pixel per inch ratio on the 1080p television allows it to emit a sharper image than the 480p does; same with printing. To understand this, imagine that both televisions are exactly the same size. We will use 40 inches for this exercise. at 40 inches, it doesn't matter whether the television is a 1080p television, or a 480p television, the picture is the exact same size. However, the 1080p's picture is much sharper and clearer, because it has a higher pixel resolution. 

Look at this, now you have this conversation on a detailed strung out explaination on something that poor guy didn't even need to know. Technically, as a photographer, you really don't need to know the difference between DPI and PPI either, unless you are supplying your own prints.


----------



## Big Mike (Jan 26, 2009)

I'm quite certain that we both know what we are talking about and aren't really disagreeing on anything.    It's just that I'm on a personal crusade to stop the (what I consider to be) improper use of the term DPI when it should be PPI.  Like I said, they are practically synonymous but I think that is because the improper use is so widespread.  

Part of this has led to many people coming to the forum over the years, concerned or even upset that their camera is 'shooting at' 72 DPI (although they mean PPI).  Of course, this is only a default value given by the camera or software and doesn't really mean anything in terms of image quality.  

Besides, don't modern printers lay down way more actual dots than just 300 per inch?

Yes, you are right, we (I) took this thread off course and I apologize to the original poster.


----------



## TheUndisputed (Jan 26, 2009)

Big Mike said:


> Besides, don't modern printers lay down way more actual dots than just 300 per inch?




No, unless you are printing something like the size of a billboard, then most will want a resolution of or over double, so 600dpi or ove. Standard print resolution is 300. I have never done a billboard. I do stand ups, and large sized posters, and all of them are 300dpi.

oh yes, and I am sorry for contributing for the misguiding of the subject. However, they did get to learn something, regardless, and it did have a little bit to do with the answer he was seeking.


----------



## Big Mike (Jan 26, 2009)

I'm not expert on printers...but the specs of mine are:


> Max Resolution ( B&W ): 600 dpi x 600 dpi
> Max Resolution ( Color ): 9600 dpi x 2400 dpi



I talked to a guy who prints and installs images that go on the sides of buses...he said they are printed at 60 DPI or something like that.


----------



## TheUndisputed (Jan 26, 2009)

Big Mike said:


> I'm not expert on printers...but the specs of mine are:
> 
> 
> I talked to a guy who prints and installs images that go on the sides of buses...he said they are printed at 60 DPI or something like that.



WOW, I have never heard of that. A printer would laugh at me if I sent them an image that was to be printed at 60DPI. That's crazy. Does he have pictures of the buses? I would like to see how clear they turn out.

If you want to see some of the things I have done, you can check out:

http://www.myspace.com/lockhartimagery

Of course, they have been scaled for web use, Most of these are for 4 x 6" post card flyers and 18 x 14" - 36" x 48" posters.


----------



## Big Mike (Jan 26, 2009)

I managed to find THIS


----------



## TheUndisputed (Jan 26, 2009)

Big Mike said:


> I managed to find THIS




hahaha, that's very creative.


----------

