Jump to content

Printing Big[ish] & Fuji X


kim

Recommended Posts

Last year I got a call from a client asking me to replicate a large chunk of wood that they had hanging in a new office so they could hang it in print, life size, for different offices around the country. The Art was made up of reclaimed wooden railway sleepers from the area their new office building was built. The brief was to make it as hi-res as possible for print & it measured about 2 meters by 1.5 meters. I ended up stitching several shots and moving a few of the planks about in Photoshop later. The final file was just tipping the TIFF limit of 4Gb on output - that was a big hi-res print containing parts of about 20 images. Good days work that day.

 

I know this is talked about a lot from time to time, 'how big can I print from a Fuji camera?' Well I don't know really, outside of the theory and working it out with a calculator, just how big you can print but it's probably very big. For most people I'd say they are asking how big can I print and still have it look good from a few feet away hanging on my wall? Probably quite big, no?

 

OK so I'm not really taking things too seriously here just wanted to show a print I got today, single shot no 'pan-o-stitching' but printed it out at 20x30 inches and the detail in the print is great. I've plonked the camera and lens used to the it on the print for scale. I won't even bother mentioning the models as you'll all know no doubt. The print is a gift for a client.

 

So 16Mpx can print 20x30 inches at great resolution no problem

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited by kim
Link to post
Share on other sites

That print converts into a 50 x 70 cm and the fact that that it is a great print uit of 16Mp. doesn’t surprise me at all (nice shot, by the way).

 

My lab tells me they can easily do an exhibition quality print at 100 x 150 cm and other labs assure me that they can reach 300 cm on the long side with great quality too.

 

I would be still interested to see if there is any print size that 16Mp cannot print satisfactorily but that you can print well with 24Mp. because I am not convinced that there is any edge whatsoever but just a theoretical one.

 

 

 

 

 I’d like to know how many among us (and how often) do ever print anything anywhere near these sizes of if it is just “ bigger = better” kind of thing which has to be the equivalent of my camera goes to 11!

 

 

 

 

 

In Dubai there are so many speed cameras that buying a supercar to drive around ( if not in the desert) is an exercise in frustration but generally means: " I have 1000 HP not because I can drive fast but because I can afford it"

 

Remember Walter Matthau? He could never drive as fast as he should to keep his Ferrari from forming carbon deposits.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Very nice. I printed an a2 and wasn't happy but I think that's more to do with the image selected t0and it's processing, than the XT1. I do have a very nice A3 print hanging on my wall though.

 

Practically, I'm not sure how many prints I'd make and display over A3 (plus a nice mount and frame) let alone A2+!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, A3 is a nice size for printing alright, this large one came from a conversation with an agent about concerns about print resolution and quality of 'that camera' so kind of proving a point in a way and making sure all are happy while I'm at it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There really is no limit, though it largely depends upon viewing distance. For many years, Kodak had an 18'×60' photomural high above the concourse in New York City's Grand Central Station. Many were shot with 35mm cameras. Close up, the dye clouds were about the size of tennis balls, but from the floor, the pictures looked very crisp. 

 

Early in the digital era, I shot a portrait of a macaw with my Coolpix 990—3.34MP. A friend insisted upon a 24"×36" print. I tried to discourage him, but he would not budge. When I saw the print, I was most impressed. Big living room, and from any point it looked great. Close up, there was no pixelation and it looked quite detailed. With the 36" side being only 2048 pixels, it was 56.9 pixels per inch. Certainly a 16MP original would be sharper and more detailed when viewed side by side. However, a step or two back, and the differences would vanish.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Any print has to be viewed at the proper distance this is always been a norm with any printing method, but a little knowledge is dangerous, Alexander Pope wrote in a poem of his, and you see that people substitute sense with the unwitting tendency to overkill. More & bigger is better.

 

 

A little knowledge might go a very long way if it is knowledge and not just pretend.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...