Max printing size on Nikon D40 6.0mpx

[swift_wraith]

Further to my last post about doing some portrait pics..

What would everyone recommend as the max printing size for a 6 mega pixel camera?
My D40 outputs to 3008 x 2000 @ an average of 2.5megs when set to fine print in jpeg mode and just under 5.0meg @ same resolution in raw.

Any suggestions?

[Alfred D.]

See for yourself, swift:

[jfrancho]

Have your lab see what they can do. Their RIP software can handle the resizing for big prints better than you can. I have had excellent prints made up to 16x20 from a 5MP compact camera (Canon S500). It comes down to the quality of the initial exposure, your processing, and the lab you use.

[PetersenPhotography]

It also depends on if you've done any cropping. Sometimes I like a particular area of a photo and will make a crop that will significantly diminish the size of the file. In that case, I am limited to smaller print sizes.

[swift_wraith]

Thanks for the replies guys. I'll get my new lab to run off some large test prints and then compare them.

And Alfred D - that image is now on my noticeboard

[Robert Watcher]

While there are the real numbers that everyone likes to base enlargement on - - - more important to me is the content and expectations for display of the print. While I have printed many prints up to 20x30 using files from my D70 (a 6MP camera just like the D40 which is a camera that I also now own), a while back I printed 2 much larger prints for clients and both they and I were very pleased with the results. I think that I would not hesitate to print these files even larger if I had a need to.

24x36 is printed on canvas, gloss lacquer spray and stretched on a strecher frame (1600 ISO handheld night time image from my "Window Shopping" series) - taken with Nikon D70 6MP


------------

24x36 is mounted to Masonite with ProTexture lacquer spray applied to the surface (200 ISO 1/500th sync with wireless SB800 about 40 feet away from camera and to the left beside the subjects) - taken with Nikon D70 6MP


-----------

One thing to remember is that the larger the print, the further away will be the viewing distance. And so even the way that the print will be displayed is relevant to the maximum size that you may want to print. A couple of years ago, I had access to ab article about a commercial job where the photographer used a 1 1/2 MP image file to produce a alrge display image to cover the whole side of a transport trailer.

[brice]

Sorry, but while this may represent some sort of standard, I've found this to be anything but accurate regarding maximum image size for these megapizel sizes. I printed 20X30 posters with files from an original digital rebel (300D) with outstanding results. Viewing distance needs to come into he equation. For the record the 20X30 print I referred to looked outstanding at arms length. I didn't print it on an inkjet. It was printed professionally. Most professional printers have algorithms for enlargements that yield more than acceptable results.

What the heck does True Photo Quality mean anyway?

Originally Posted by Alfred D.

See for yourself, swift:

[jfrancho]

What the heck does True Photo Quality mean anyway?

Film has a resolution of 10-15 lp/mm.

[Smiths]

I would have to second what Brice said....

Sony Alpha 10 MP, makes outstanding 24 by 36 posters consistantly....

Now I do wonder though as I convert from RAW to TIFF PS says I have a 35 by 57 inch image, I've never tryed printing it as large as it says it can, don't know if it becomes real grainy at that point or not...

I did notice when using a friends Nikon D200 10MP camera and doing the same process the image size is much smaller in PS, didn't quite understand that....

24 by 36's look great though, printed on a Epson roll printer.....

[00silvergt]

Guys, this is the standard when using 300dpi. Alfred and others did say YMMV, however, in order to maintain 300dpi, here are the maximum print size, otherwise software may have to interpolate. Even still you may find it excellent or acceptable, but optically, the chart says what the sensor/camera can print before it needs to add "fill-in" pixels or interpolation.

[jfrancho]

Change the ppi, and you can get PS to say its whatever size you want - means nothing until you print it.

[jfrancho]

Originally Posted by 00silvergt

Guys, this is the standard when using 300dpi. Alfred and others did say YMMV, however, in order to maintain 300dpi, here are the maximum print size, otherwise software may have to interpolate. Even still you may find it excellent or acceptable, but optically, the chart says what the sensor/camera can print before it needs to add "fill-in" pixels or interpolation.

Like I said earlier, let a pro lab up res with their RIP, and you can print whatever size you want.

[Alfred D.]

Next time you see a billboard photo ad, don't race past it, but get out of your car a walk right up to it so you can actually see the print resolution properly. It may come as a shock to you. You will realize that any resolution's apparent sharpness is entirely dependent on the viewing distance.

Orinally posted by Brice
What the heck does True Photo Quality mean anyway?

That's the quality – the apparent sharpness – of a print of a 35mm film frame at 8x6" observed from a distance of between 12 and 16 inches (standard reading distance).

[jfrancho]

Since when was 35mm standard print in 4:3 aspect? Wouldn't you want to use the entire image?

[brice]

Originally Posted by Alfred D.

That's the quality – the apparent sharpness – of a print of a 35mm film frame at 8x6" observed from a distance of between 12 and 16 inches (standard reading distance).

"Apparent"

So if I get prints from my older 6mp camera at 20X30 and at 12-16 inches the apparent sharpness is acceptable then I have true photo quality. Realistically I wouldn't look at a 20X30 at 16 inches, therefore viewing distance is the true factor in determining apparent quality.

And I agree about billboards. They look pretty darn good at 100 feet or so.