September 5, 2018 at 9:12 am #17271
Generally speaking the biggest print you should make is a 300 ppi one. That means that a 25megapixel-ish camera, which produces a 6000 x 4000px image can easily give you a 20×13″ print. It is often said that EPSON prints give optimal results at 360ppi; giving us a 16 x 11″ print, perfectly adequate for an exhibition image.
If you crop your picture you are obviously losing pixels and things become challenging in terms of getting optimal results. 10 years ago, when we generally had fewer pixels to play with it was often said you could get away with printing at 200ppl or even 150ppi. I don’t think the results would look good against today’s top quality prints.
But can’t we just enlarge? Well, no. Enlarging does not help anymore than printing at a lower quality. The information which provides the detail just IS NOT THERE.
So the advice is – don’t enlarge. Unless, that is, you use the enlarging facility in OnOne software, which has been available for years and uses some fancy fratals matematics, you are not going to get anything worthwhile.
Until now. Topaz have just brought out AI Gigapixel – an enlarging program which uses articial intelligence to guess at the missing detail. In a demo I have seen it seems to do a good job but it is extremely demanding on processor power and I’m afraid my 6 year-old desktop may not cope. OnOne can take a long, long time to work, so I’m not confident that AI Gig is worthwhile for me at present but they give detailed advice on their website as to how your gear will manage (my graphics card isn’t even on the list!).
BTW Photoshop has been greatly improved regarding enlargement and is worth looking at, but my thoughts are – stick to 300ppi and just make smaller enlargements!
Smaller sensor cameras and phones always mush detail – especially when you increase the ISO setting. In the end, this is their limitation and, though improvements have been made, you will encounter that limitation as you start to make bigger prints. It is noise, I suppose and it is always a compromise between noise suppression and loss of detail.
Things are getting better though and the little RX100M3 Sony that I bought this summer is much better at rendering detail than the Canon G7 I had years back. Just keep the ISO low!September 5, 2018 at 11:00 am #17272
Thanks for that useful information just in time for the start of the season John. The enlarging algorithms are getting better all the time and are making educated guesses in creating new pixels.
Sometimes I wonder why manufactures produced cameras with such large megapixel resolutions. I now realise that it means you can heavily crop an image and still get fine image without it pixelating. Does this mean you could get away without carrying a big heavy telephoto lens?September 5, 2018 at 2:16 pm #17274
Very complex isn,t it. The criteria being a perfectly pin sharp evenly graduated photo at maximum enlargement. Takes me back to a quality enlargement from a 2 -1/4 sqr camera was superia to one from 35mm. Is there some devil in your last line Peter I wonder. Cropping and acheiving the same quality enlargment suggests equally fine results could be acheived with a smaller sensor. I doubt that –maybe one day.September 5, 2018 at 2:16 pm #17275
Very complex isn,t it. The criteria being a perfectly pin sharp evenly graduated photo at maximum enlargement. Takes me back to a quality enlargement from a 2 -1/4 sqr camera was superia to one from 35mm. Is there some devil in your last line Peter I wonder. Cropping and acheiving the same quality enlargment suggests equally fine results could be acheived with a smaller sensor. I doubt that –maybe one day.September 5, 2018 at 4:33 pm #17276
Canon now have a mirror-less Full frame camera see it at.
Thought they would do something as Sony and now Nikon have full frame mirror-less cameras
No indication yet of price pre order starts 12th September
September 5, 2018 at 5:11 pm #17278
- This reply was modified 2 months, 2 weeks ago by wbaxter.
There are some prices think on PetaPixel. Pansonic next.September 5, 2018 at 5:39 pm #17279
In answer to Peter’s point, about cropping to give a telephoto effect, you can do that but you will immediately lose detail. It is still offered as a cheapjack “zoom”. Even Leica use this trick on one model having full frame sensor but a 28mm lens and then cropping to give 35 and 50mm equivalent. Nothing is achieved by this which you couldn’t get by cropping during processing but sometimes the cameras built in computer will do some upscaling maths to give a better result. Unfortunately this is only available during the jpeg processing so you lose tbe facility of being able to process from raw.
The extent to which you can crop is limited and you also have to remember that focussing would have to have an accuracy very hard to achieve with a wide angle lens, not to mention the fact tbat your intended picture would only be a tiny part of you field of view. The M Leicas give you an idea of what this means, the 135mm framelines in the viewfinder (which normally covers 35mm) are tiny and very difficult to use.
Yes, a new Canon mirrorless and no advanced fuss. I think we may find it has a few tricks up its sleeve too!September 5, 2018 at 10:28 pm #17280
All quite true. But——with exception I.E. -STRINGS—–massive crop to weedle out a picture—correct in camera settings and fill the frame should be a first objective.September 6, 2018 at 5:49 pm #17286
Full details on the Canon R from Digital Camera is at
Prices are about Mk4 level, new lens are expensive.September 6, 2018 at 10:39 pm #17287
AND NOW FUJI-X-T3 AT ABOUT 1.5K.October 4, 2018 at 5:49 pm #17383
Came across this today, you may be interested in having a look.October 4, 2018 at 6:18 pm #17384
Super find Wallace. A great deal of fine work by a superb craftswoman, sheer delight to behold. The work explores the areas that we don’t get to know about Venice but I enjoyed her pictures of food, gardens and peasant farming even more.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.