• Please use real names.

    Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed

    Firstname Lastname

    Register

    We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know!
  • Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!

Large prints ? Yes !

nicolas claris

OPF Co-founder/Administrator
Hi all
in a recent thread (http://www.openphotographyforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7691) about the new Nikon Dx3 Fahim was wondering why so many pixels and who can need that…

As the hereunder print where being printed, I didn't want to reply Fahim too soon, I preffered to be able to show you the following…

From last Friday to next Sunday, the Paris Boat show is opened. We of course have some clients there, and for the bigger two of them (don't point others to this thread! ;-) we have printed large files for a toatl nearly reaching 50 meters (164 feet) long… and I don't count any print under 2 meters wide (6.5 feet)…

These prints were made from shots done with the Canon 1Ds3 or the Sinar HY6 and its DB Emotion 75 LV. I'll post a sample of one Sinar shot in the MF Format, though the Canon do stuning files, there is just nothing to compare with the Sinar IQ…

All prints have been subcontracted (as usual) to our lab Dupon. For cost reasons, they aren't Lambda prints but directly printed to PVC rigid support with a HRO Dursty inkjet… If you want to know more about this printer, do google search HRO and Durst…

Soooooo, here is a shot 8 meters (more than 26, yes twenty six feet) wide… The orginal shot is wider and higher (yes, Asher, sometimes we do crop our images… ;-). This is 80% in width of the original… (Technically I had prefered a full frame!).

_45R5612_bdx.jpg


_45R5634_bdx.tif


100% crop:


_45R5635_bdx_crop100.jpg


Not bad, but if you give more pixels, I'll take them! but remember, please: this is 8 meters (more than 26 feet) wide!

Here is the Sinar sample…
 

Ken Tanaka

pro member
These are gorgeous images, and prints, Nicolas. I'll bet you feel spray just standing next to those images. I'm sure it was a kick to see your wonderful images printed so darn large! (Editorial: That might be the closest many previously prospective buyers get to one of those boats for a while.)

I am amazed at just how good Godzilla-size printing has become, driven entirely by the demands (and big budgets) of the advertising industry. Yes, most of this stuff ends up as transient visual pollution. But it can be a tool for very positive impact, too.

You don't, however, need a megapixel camera or back to create this stuff. Just good exposures, -very- careful post-processing, and a skilled lab.

In 2006 a number of my images were used by Toronto's Art Gallery of Ontario for an exhibit of architect Frank Gehry's recent works. (Gehry actually grew up just a few blocks from the AGO and had just finished a design for the AGO's expansion, which recently opened.) Below is a snap of me standing in front of two of my images at the exhibit.

58942347.jpg


I captured both of these images, as well as most of the others used in the exhibit, with a Canon 1D Mark II (yes, 8 megapixels!). In my opinion, images from the 1DII remain among the best quality I've ever seen. The 12' x 20+' images shown above were printed on a vinyl film made by Kodak and then mounted directly on the gallery walls rather like huge wallpaper sheets. (This is very common for ad work.)

My preparation of the images for such a display amounted to first up-sizing the files to 16 megapixels. I experimented with Genuine Fractals -vs- Photoshop's built-in image scaler, ultimately selecting Photoshop's facility. I then performed a series of subtle maneuvers to ensure that the mid-tones retained their detail (a hazard with vinyl film printing), that the images were appropriately sharp to appear natural at that size (done with Pixel Genius's tools), and that there were no hints of up-size artifacts (done by adding a -very- small bit of noise across the images).

The results were beyond my wildest expectations. Although I do not have a close-up detail such as yours I, too, was stunned at the preservation of detail in these (roughly 100 dpi) prints.

But my message in this thread is that anyone considering getting larger-than-normal prints made should not be discouraged by lack of a big-pixel-count camera. In fact, if you live near a good printing lab, I'd encourage you to get a big print or two made for yourself. As Nicolas's note suggested, prints can now be made on a variety of rigid substrates, most commonly plastic board and sometimes even aluminum sheets!

----
You can see a few more snaps of the AGO Gehry exhibit HERE.
 

nicolas claris

OPF Co-founder/Administrator
Bonsoir Ken
thanks for the kind words!
I do agree with you, that quantity of mpixel isn't just enough, but it helps! see the 33 Mpix shot I just posted in the MF fora, there is still a huge difference between both cameras!
The difficulty (and the danger for the photographer!) here is that these aren't bilboards put high on buildings in the street, people can even touch the print! so close!
On the other hand, 8 meter print is quite rare, and yes I also did big enlargements with my 1DS in the prehistory (few years ago;-). But not hat big! 2 or 3 meters wide was already a challenge…

So more "good" pixels + real improvement of printing technologies do help!

And yes, like you, I can only say to others with lesser pixel camera, frame well, expose well so you have as few as possible PP and send your file to a pro lab! a bit costy but worth the pleasure to put on your wall!
BTW most of pro labs will print some crop of your files for testing before printing wide (I did with the picture shown above).

I woiuld also add that my new monitor (Nec Spectraview 3090) does help a lot to check those huge files whenn PPing… because of it size but also because of the quality of the image reproduction.
 

Michael Fontana

pro member
Bonsoir Nicolas

well, 8 m is quite large ;-)

I haven't done as large as that, 2.4 m @ 400 dpi (on Lambda) was the largest.
You mentioned it, post has to be done very subtile; very important is in my eyperience - apart from the good lab - the lens.

I kinda agree with Ken:

I'd take any moment a cam with less, but °healthier° pixels, plus the better lens.

That's not against more pixels, or MF, but just a consideration of the other factors:
edge sharpness of a lens - or the lack of it - will became really obvious in a blow-up, less for your yachts-shots, as there seems to be water and sky in the corner.

You wrote it in the other thread; one big difference is the amount of time you spend with pp, when looking at DSLR vs MFback.

Another question: how big can these prints become in height?

Ken: can you point me to that tecnique, printing on aluminium?

I might need it - sooner or later - at about 2 x 4 meters.... for some of my mountain-stitches... and think aluminium would be fine....
 

nicolas claris

OPF Co-founder/Administrator
Ken: can you point me to that tecnique, printing on aluminium?

I might need it - sooner or later - at about 2 x 4 meters.... for some of my mountain-stitches... and think aluminium would be fine....

With the same printer that my lab uses, the aluminum is called Dibond (that's a brand), in fact its a composite complex made of 2 aluminum thin plates with some foam in between.
It won't bent as PVC does with heat… You may print directly on it or paste a lambda print or any inkjet prints.
Printing directly is cheaper, but you don't have the lambda quality…

The HRO Durst printer

Dibond
 

nicolas claris

OPF Co-founder/Administrator
Another question: how big can these prints become in height?

Bonsoir again
Agrred with all your's and Ken's comments, pixel aren't enough, but add lot of good pixels, best lens, best sensor (or back for MF) good settings (as shooting, particularly low iso and good exposure) you'll get the best results…

The height? the pics shown here and the Sinar thread are several panels placed together, so the limit is the length of the plate on which you print or paste your print… and the size of the room in the lab! LoL!
 

nicolas claris

OPF Co-founder/Administrator
In 2006 a number of my images were used by Toronto's Art Gallery of Ontario for an exhibit of architect Frank Gehry's recent works. (Gehry actually grew up just a few blocks from the AGO and had just finished a design for the AGO's expansion, which recently opened.) Below is a snap of me standing in front of two of my images at the exhibit.

58942347.jpg

Ken
I would have loved to see this exhibition in real, Gehry's architecture thru your skills and vision, what a thrill!
 

Ken Tanaka

pro member
Michael: I see that Nicolas already answered your inquiry. I think that there are several large-format, multi-substrate printing systems and techniques. So your local lab might use something else.

The most striking aluminum-based print I've ever seen was a large Richard Avendon portrait temporarily propped against a table in the Art Institute of Chicago's photo department workroom. It was a piece from their collection that's I'd never seen exhibited. But when I came around the corner and saw it just sitting there I was flabbergasted.

One of the more striking printing techniques I've seen recently has been reverse printing on the back of a clear acrylic sheet. I'm not familiar with how it's done, although it's apparently not new. This technique can create a certain creamy depth to images with particular color palettes and contrasts. Hard to describe.
 

nicolas claris

OPF Co-founder/Administrator
One of the more striking printing techniques I've seen recently has been reverse printing on the back of a clear acrylic sheet. I'm not familiar with how it's done, although it's apparently not new. This technique can create a certain creamy depth to images with particular color palettes and contrasts. Hard to describe.

LoL! Technic used already 2 years ago in an exhibition in Bordeaux (Asher saw it!) and then in my stand at the 2007 Dusseldorf boot messe…The undescribable effect is not seen on the pic below, but that was it, and I can tell you it made prople stopp immediately when they saw it!
It was, 1.50 x 2.25 meters wide, a film pasted on the back of a 15 mm thick plexiglass… wheights like hell!

IMG_2264_LR.jpg
 

Ken Tanaka

pro member
Acht! You're way ahead of me, Nicolas! Is the image printed on vinyl and then sandwiched between sheets of acrylic? (Yeah, that would "weigh like hell".)

As a side note, these alternative printing and display techniques are giving museum curators fits. Storing ever-larger prints that increasingly have 3-dimensions presents some real issues for museum photo departments whose storage facilities are often designed to accommodate mainly 2-D works.
 

nicolas claris

OPF Co-founder/Administrator
Hi Ken
the image is printed on an adhesive film, then carefully (without air bubles!) stuck on the back of the acrylic sheet (15 mm (a bit more than 1/2 inch) thick). No sandwich there, this is maybe another technic…
It brings unbelievable depth and pop-ups gradients…
You only have to deal with Reflection, but that's a question of light control… for example, on the snap of my stand upthere, the blue color behind the word Photography is an unwished (though nice?) light parasit which you may not see if you move 1/2 a meter…
But this should be easily controlled in a gallery or in a museum (in fact in any place where the board will be hung);
 

Ken Tanaka

pro member
The people photographer's say "Show Big - Sell Big". These are wonderful.

(I was happy to sell a 30"x40" print this week...)

You know, photographers also have a saying: "If you can't make it good, make it RED. If you can't make it RED, make it BIG!"

You SHOULD be very proud to sell a print, regardless of size, Kathy. I certainly would be.
 

Michael Fontana

pro member
Thanks Nicolas and Ken
for your hints; yep, the aluminium dibond togehter with a flatbed printer seems to look fine to me, point of view materiality. How is IQ with these printers - compared to, lets say a Lambda? How big is the loss of quality? How stable are the colors in time?

Ken: what's that °vinyl film made by Kodak° ?
Is it glued directly to the wall - therefore just to use for one exhibition?
 

Michael Fontana

pro member
You know, photographers also have a saying: "If you can't make it good, make it RED. If you can't make it RED, make it BIG!"

You SHOULD be very proud to sell a print, regardless of size, Kathy. I certainly would be.

I heard that RED-BIG-sentence as well; its con: it will not hold to long in time.

Kathy: Congratulations!
 
The "big and red" phenomenon is older than photography. There is a famous story about Turner showing a large seascape at a salon at the Royal Academy, where paintings were sometimes actually still in progress as they were shown. And to draw attention away from an adjacent painting by Constable, Turner painted a bright red buoy in the foreground of his seascape.
 
Nicolas, I had the same experience with a client when I shot some furniture pieces and he took the files to the printer. He said that the designer was positively surprised on how much he could crop the images...

Now, the other aspect of the equation is going to be, from now on, when sensors are capturing so much information, the front part of the capture: the lens.

If yous see in your detail image, there is a blue fringe at the end of the boat. I see this with some of my lenses -particularly with the Mamiya 35mm wide angle-, and fix it in different ways (an easy cheat is to use the Brush Tool (B) and set to -color-.

Regarding 4x5, I don't think that even if you managed to shoot 4x5 transparencies from the helicopter and scanned them you would get a more satisfying image than that...

Thank you for the example, Nicolas, we are all jealous...

_45R5635_bdx_crop100.jpg
 

Ken Tanaka

pro member
Ken: what's that °vinyl film made by Kodak° ?
Is it glued directly to the wall - therefore just to use for one exhibition?

Yes, this vinyl is applied directly to the gallery wall. I don't know if it's coated with some type of tack on one side but I suspect so, since it must be removable with no damage to the wall. You see this stuff used on billboard and all types of large indoor and outdoor displays. I know that DuPont also makes such printable films, even in Tyvek! My AGO images were produced on a Vutek which is a pretty common type of printer for this work.

And, yes, at the end of the exhibition the images were peeled from the wall and trashed.
 

Ken Tanaka

pro member
Regarding 4x5, I don't think that even if you managed to shoot 4x5 transparencies from the helicopter and scanned them you would get a more satisfying image than that...
An interesting anecdote regarding film.

That Gehry exhibit was actually quite a grand display that featured works from around the world. Many of the other project images displayed large were taken by some very accomplished professional architectural photographers on film. Although the film-sourced images were all beautiful compositions and were unquestionably publishable they all looked somewhat dull and quite unsharp compared to digitally-sourced images at that scale. It apparently gave the curators, and the printers, some fits. Since each projects images (and models) were somewhat compartmentalized the differences were not as stark to average visitors. But it was very obvious that digital images do far, far better at such large-scale displays.
 

Marcel Walker

pro member
thank you

Ken,

Thank you for sharing your work!!! I just did an overseas trip and would love to do some large prints from my 1D II that I shot with. Your work gave me such HOPE!!! Thank you again!!!!
 
Top