snubbr.com

Whats your largest print size on a non-SLR?
Whats your largest print size on a non-SLR and what camera did you use to do it? Were you happy with the output?..

Comments (14)

I have a Canon A710, which is a 7.1 MP camera (3072 x 2304.) I print the image at 15.26" x 11.52" (on 16 x 20 paper), which works out to 200 pixels per inch. I am very happy with the results. Detail is fine and I don't see any pixelation..

Remember that the vast majority of commercial printing businesses print at 250 pixels per inch. Mpix states that images that print at 250 pixels per inch are optimal. That makes sense because that's the resolution of the printers. Mpix also states that 100 pixels per inch is the minimum for acceptable results. So according to MPIX, you can print a 7.1 MP, 3072 x 2304 image as large as 20 x 30..

Personally, I think thats really pushing it, and 150 PPI is the smallest I would ever go (under duress.) I think 200 PPI is a good minimum to stick to. That means that a 12 MP camera should be able to print on 16 X 20 paper with good results. 11 X 14 is the largest standard size that I would print from a 7.1 MP camera..

Please remember that the DPI setting in a JPG means absolutely nothing. All commercial printers will zoom or shrink your image to fit on the paper size you selected. So its actually quite difficult to print your image at any specific PPI unless you first manipulate the image to print a certain way. The way I print my 7.1 MP image at 200 PPI on 16 X 20 paper is to resize the canvas of my original 3072 x 2304 image to 4000 x 3200. Resizing the canvas is a specific function you can perform in most image editing software such as Photoshop (Elements) or Paint Shop Pro. In my particular case, the printed result was an image smaller than the 16 X 20 paper, with a 2  white border around it...which is exactly what I wanted..

Finally, remember that commercial printers will expand your image an additional 2% or so to account for the technical realities of the printer. The paper will drift as it rolls through the printer. If they tried to print your image at exactly 16 x 20 and the paper drifts, you might get a strip of white on one edge. So they print slightly larger than 16 x 20 to insure full coverage of the paper. So my image actually printed at around 197 PPI. But thats fine...it still looks good...

Comment #1

Fuji E900 - 18"x22", IIRC. Somewhere around there anyway. Very pleased. Printed by a local Fuji print shop on Fuji Crystal Archive paper, gift for my brother's girlfriend. Print wasn't that much, matting and frame cost a motza!.

Rob.

Everyone, everywhere, has to do everything for a first time. There is no shame in failure, only in failure to try...

Comment #2

I've done a few 8x10's with my power shot A630 (8 mp), which looked really good. They probably could of gone up to 11x14 with no real quality loss. These were of course under optimal conditions. On the few times I've bumped the ISO to 400 I wouldn't go for more than a 4x6...

Comment #3

Bholmes4 wrote:.

Whats your largest print size on a non-SLR and what camera did youuse to do it? Were you happy with the output?.

This is a very broad question and thus has no good answer..

First, the range of camera qualities in that "non-SLR" category is vast. There are "non-SLR" cameras with tiny sensors and there are "non-SLR" cameras with huge sensors. NOTE: I am NOT speaking about how many pixels they have, but rather the physical size of the sensor. There are "non-SLR" cameras with only poor JPEG output and there are "non-SLR" cameras with RAW output..

Then, there are common techniques to "stitch" images together to make large composites. These composite images can be as big as you have the patience to construct and thus the size of the "print" they can produce is likewise unbounded..

A good way to estimate what you want to know is to assume that the ability to produce big images is proportional to the price of the camera (including lens for removable lens cameras). Depending on how critical you are, the constant of proportianality can be from 0.2 to 1. I tend to judge harshly so my personal formula is:.

Every $1 spent on camera = 0.2 square inches of print.

Thus a $100 camera will produce a 20 square-inch print (approx. 3.5" x 6").A $1000 camera will produce a 200 square-inch print (approx. 12" x 16")A $5000 camera will produce a 1000 square-inch print (approx. 25" x 40").

This will, of course, precipitate dolts posting that their $243 camera made a bigger print than my formula predicted (approx. 5.5" x 9")...which just says they are blind in one eye and can't see out of the other one. .

Charlie DavisNikon 5700, Sony R1, Nikon D300HomePage: http://www.1derful.infoBridge Blog: http://www.here-ugo.com/BridgeBlog/..

Comment #4

Sony R1 prints are as good as any other 10 megapixel whether dSLR or fixed lens at any competitive size..

Lin.

Bholmes4 wrote:.

Whats your largest print size on a non-SLR and what camera did youuse to do it? Were you happy with the output?..

Comment #5

So a 12mp like the g9 should be able to safely print at 16x20? Good to know.....

Comment #6

Bholmes4 wrote:.

So a 12mp like the g9 should be able to safely print at 16x20?.

Not sure what is unsafe about printing big? But, "Yes" that G9 will successfully print 15" x 20" (that size uses the full 3:4 aspect ratio of the G9). It will look good from a proper viewing distance..

At 300 square inches, it would look better with a $1500 camera. .

Charlie DavisNikon 5700, Sony R1, Nikon D300HomePage: http://www.1derful.infoBridge Blog: http://www.here-ugo.com/BridgeBlog/..

Comment #7

Sorry I suppose that is poor wording. I mean would most people consider the print to be an acceptable enough quality at that size?.

A $1500 camera is ideal but I need a P&S for daily use before I consider buying an expensive, SLR camera. Maybe in a couple years if I really enjoy this hobby I can justify such an expense...

Comment #8

Bholmes4 wrote:.

Whats your largest print size on a non-SLR and what camera did youuse to do it? Were you happy with the output?.

I went to a photo seminar a couple of years ago and the presenter had a 24"X36" printed from a P&S with a oneish meg sensor. There were 30 or so people and the consensus was that the output was okay. I don't remember if it was upresed..

I've printed good 10X12s from a 2.1 meg (small) sensor. Would I place it in a museum? No. Would it stand up to a loupe inspection? No. Would people look at it hanging on the wall and notice that it wasn't done on a 7.1 meg sensor? Also no..

The image looks good to the casual observer even photographers. If you frame your shots correctly then sensor size is not a big issue, however, if you crop a lot then the extra megs are welcome..

REd..

Comment #9

Red13 wrote:.

Bholmes4 wrote:.

Whats your largest print size on a non-SLR and what camera did youuse to do it? Were you happy with the output?.

I went to a photo seminar a couple of years ago and the presenter hada 24"X36" printed from a P&S with a oneish meg sensor. There were 30or so people and the consensus was that the output was okay. I don'tremember if it was upresed..

I've printed good 10X12s from a 2.1 meg (small) sensor. Would Iplace it in a museum? No. Would it stand up to a loupe inspection?No. Would people look at it hanging on the wall and notice that itwasn't done on a 7.1 meg sensor? Also no..

The image looks good to the casual observer even photographers. Ifyou frame your shots correctly then sensor size is not a big issue,however, if you crop a lot then the extra megs are welcome..

REd.

That really sounds like pushing it, but sure, all people are different and maybe non-photographers are less likely to spot shortcomings in quality than $10k DSLR-gear users are....

Personally I print and sell 30x40 cm prints (that is 12"x16") from my 6MP compact..

That looks real good on a wall from like 1 meters distance, but nothing for heavy cropping or extreme closeup-inspections..

I think I would say that noise and optical quality overall is more important than the number of MP.http://sebastianfoto.se/..

Comment #10

Chuxter wrote:.

First, the range of camera qualities in that "non-SLR" category isvast. There are "non-SLR" cameras with tiny sensors and there are"non-SLR" cameras with huge sensors. NOTE: I am NOT speaking abouthow many pixels they have, but rather the physical size of thesensor..

AFAIK there aren't any non-SLR digital cameras that have huge sensors at the moment. The biggest sensors I have seen on non-SLR digital cameras (digital compacts) are about 1/1.65" and that is very small..

Unless Sigma have finally overcome the technical problems and released the DP1 there aren't any non-SLRs digitals with big sensors they all have small ones..

John..

Comment #11

John10001 wrote:.

Chuxter wrote:.

First, the range of camera qualities in that "non-SLR" category isvast. There are "non-SLR" cameras with tiny sensors and there are"non-SLR" cameras with huge sensors. NOTE: I am NOT speaking abouthow many pixels they have, but rather the physical size of thesensor..

AFAIK there aren't any non-SLR digital cameras that have huge sensorsat the moment..

I agree. But just because no non-mirror-box camera with a big sensor is currently being sold new in camera stores doesn't mean that all the previous ones ceased to exist..

The biggest sensors I have seen on non-SLR digitalcameras (digital compacts) are about 1/1.65" and that is very small..

I agree. All of my cameras have sensors bigger than that. 2 of them are non-dSLRs..

Charlie DavisNikon 5700, Sony R1, Nikon D300HomePage: http://www.1derful.infoBridge Blog: http://www.here-ugo.com/BridgeBlog/..

Comment #12

Leica M8. 108x72cm. I just did not have a wider printer.Irakly Shanidzehttp://www.shanidze.com/en..

Comment #13

I did several 20in. x 30in. prints from this 6.2MP (Interpolated) camera. Numerous 16x20's as well. They look great. No real difference from the 6.1MP D70..

I've yet to print anything large from the D300. That will be when I can really tell what difference the larger MP count makes..

Chefziggyhttp://www.pbase.com/chefziggy/lecream..

Comment #14

Click Here to View All...

Sponsored Amazon Deals:

1. Get big savings on Amazon warehouse deals.
2. Save up to 70% on Amazon Products.


This question was taken from a support group/message board and re-posted here so others can learn from it.

 

Categories: Home | Diet & Weight Management | Vitamins & Supplements | Herbs & Cleansing |

Sexual Health | Medifast Support | Nutrisystem Support | Medifast Questions |

Web Hosting | Web Hosts | Website Hosting | Hosting |

Web Hosting | GoDaddy | Digital Cameras | Best WebHosts |

Web Hosting FAQ | Web Hosts FAQ | Hosting FAQ | Hosting Group |

Hosting Questions | Camera Tips | Best Cameras To Buy | Best Cameras This Year |

Camera Q-A | Digital Cameras Q-A | Camera Forum | Nov 2010 - Cameras |

Oct 2010 - Cameras | Oct 2010 - DSLRs | Oct 2010 - Camera Tips | Sep 2010 - Cameras |

Sep 2010 - DSLRS | Sep 2010 - Camera Tips | Aug 2010 - Cameras | Aug 2010 - DSLR Tips |

Aug 2010 - Camera Tips | July 2010 - Cameras | July 2010 - Nikon Cameras | July 2010 - Canon Cameras |

July 2010 - Pentax Cameras | Medifast Recipes | Medifast Recipes Tips | Medifast Recipes Strategies |

Medifast Recipes Experiences | Medifast Recipes Group | Medifast Recipes Forum | Medifast Support Strategies |

Medifast Support Experiences |

 

(C) Copyright 2010 All rights reserved.