Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: D100 printing size  (Read 3408 times)
Dan Sroka
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 594


WWW
« on: March 27, 2003, 10:44:46 AM »
ReplyReply

I regularly make prints of that size from my D100, with no reinterpolation, and the results have been (for my work) identical to my film work. Well, actually, I prefer the D100 prints!

But as we all say, your mileage may vary: as with any type of medium, you'll get different results depending on what you shoot, how you shoot, etc.

Since you are a film scanner (like me), to get the image control you are used to, I would totally recommend you get Nikon Capture -- it gives you much greater control over raw files than the built-in Nikon View. Adobe's Camera Raw and MacBibble are also nice for conversions, but I prefer Capture since you can save your adjustments directly into the file.

Dan
Logged
pablo
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4


WWW
« Reply #1 on: March 27, 2003, 11:06:50 AM »
ReplyReply

Thank you Dansroka,

Excuse me, but I don't understand how can you print 12x16 a D100 file (say at 240 dpi) without ressing it up.
As far as I know At 240 dpi the max image size should be 3008/240x2000/240 = 8,30x12,50 inches.

I'll definitly get Capture.
Thanks.
Logged

Pablo
grigiomedio.net
Peter McLennan
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 1662


« Reply #2 on: March 27, 2003, 11:16:47 PM »
ReplyReply

Stitching is the easiest way I know to increase your megapixels at nearly zero cost. Stitching just two images will nearly double your MP's.  That means bigger, better prints.  Whatever your camera.

For landscapes, it's a natural.

Peter
Logged
pablo
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4


WWW
« Reply #3 on: March 29, 2003, 07:00:56 AM »
ReplyReply

As far as I know, you need to use on Epson inkjet printers at least 240 dpi or a submultiple of the max printing resolution. In fact they suggest 240, 300, 360 dpi, to ease the drivers' job in converting RGB to CYMK.

Anyway I'll try with different resolutions  ::
Logged

Pablo
grigiomedio.net
pablo
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4


WWW
« Reply #4 on: March 27, 2003, 05:38:52 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi everybody.
I'm about to make the final step in digital photography (well I know it might be just the beginning). I have recently tried the Nikon D100 and I liked it very much.
It seems to deliver sharper and cleaner images than my usual scans of 35mm from a Nikon Coolscan IV ED (I developed a weird sort of brand loyalty :: ) but at the cost of a reduced size.

I was wondering what's the limit of printable size using Raw files. Besides the enchanched workflow (scanning is time consuming), I'd like to understand if I'm going to get better or worse quality, say in a 12x16 inches print.

Up to now from a clean 35mm shot (tripod, remote shutter release, mirror lockup) I'm getting pretty decent prints of this size.
I'd like to know if anybody has any experience in ressing up D100 files to this printing size (even using Genuine Fractals) and if quality compares to 12x16 blown prints of 35mm film.

Thank you very much.

Paolo Valentini
grigiomedio
Logged

Pablo
grigiomedio.net
jdemott
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 434


« Reply #5 on: March 27, 2003, 11:01:31 AM »
ReplyReply

I've been using a D100 since last July and I have made quite a few prints on 13 x 19 paper (approximately 12 x 18 prints usually). Before printing at that size, I increase the file resolution to at least 240ppi. Although I have Genuine Fractals, I have been generally satisfied using successive iterations of Photoshop bicubic interpolation, similar to the "stairstep" method.

Overall, I am delighted with the results. I very seldom use my film scanner anymore. The D100 generally produces better results, with a lot less work. The accurate colors, absence of noise, and shadow detail are all great.

There have been endless arguments on the web about how much digital resolution is necessary to match 35mm. I won't try to re-hash those (or re-ignite the flames). Instead I'll just leave it at the fact that I find I am more frequently satisfied with prints at the size you mention using the D100 than with scanning 35mm film on a desktop film scanner. That is not the same thing as saying that there aren't times I wish for more resolution--some scenes just benefit from a lot of detail and you notice the lack of resolution as you enlarge beyond 8 x 10 (but that is true with 35mm film). Print quality isn't just resolution; it is resolution, contrast, color, absence of noise, dynamic range, ability to hold detail in the shadows and highlights, etc. When you look at all those factors, I think you'll be happy with the D100 at the print sizes you mention.

By the way, there is a partial solution to the resolution question for landscape work: stitching several D100 frames together digitally. I just recently returned from a trip to Death Valley. Most of my shots were conventional single frame shots, but I also did a few panoramas. Right now I am looking at a 12 x 42 print made from 8 D100 frames (taken in portrait orientation) and the detail is unbelievable!
Logged

John DeMott
pablo
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4


WWW
« Reply #6 on: March 27, 2003, 12:29:46 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks,
I have no more doubts now.

And stitching pics is a good idea, when you have time and the necessary calm to take a few vertical shots of the same panorama.

Actually most of my work is A4 size, but when I get THE exceptional photo which I want to print 12x16 I don't want to regret not having used a more performing tool.
Logged

Pablo
grigiomedio.net
Dan Sroka
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 594


WWW
« Reply #7 on: March 29, 2003, 01:04:31 AM »
ReplyReply

Pablo, numbers like 240 dpi are just rules of thumb. People commonly suggest that photos have resolutions anywhere between 200 and 350 dpi, because these resolutions seem to work for most situations. These suggested numbers come from guidelines developed for traditional offset printing methods (like books, magazines, etc.), and while they don't directly apply to inkjet printing, they are a good place to start. The actual resolution you need is determined by the subject of the photo, the colors, your printing style, the paper, etc. -- technically, each photo is different. Try a print to see how it looks before you res up a photo.

Dan
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad