Someone wants to buy my photos, oh my!

[agaace]

So I'm happy: someone wants to hang my pictures on their wall (they bought a new house, and want MY IMAGES on the walls, wow!!). But.. I've never printed my photos before.. I don't even have a calibrated screen yet (saving money.. had to prioritize other expenses first). And he wants one of my shots (the Golden Gate Bridge at night) at 90 x 60 cm, and two other shots at 40 x 30cm. I don't know how many megapixels my poor 40D makes, I think around 12MP.. do you think it's enough to print such big formats? Is there anything I should do to prepare my shots for big format prints? I don't know, more noise reduction, convert to a color profile (they are all sRGB), sharpen? Help! I feel like a baby lost in a forest..

[Jim B.]

I just started to read about printing photos and found this to be helpful.
http://www.design215.com/toolbox/megapixels.php
At least this will help with your 1st question.

[agaace]

Very helpful Jim, thanks!

[dvp]

agaace
Would'nt it be wonderful if your D40 clicked golden gate picture could be converted into a film negative? Film has infinite pixels! What an idea!!

[carregwen]

Congrats to you. I find it nice when someone buys my work. The 40D is 10MP, but that isn't necessarily a problem. I sold a 30x20 inch landscape taken on a 350D (8MP) and it looked fine. I think a lot depends on how good the shot is image-quality-wise. There are on-line print houses that will print it for you, and some of them are pretty good - you need to check locally. You're not giving up the day job yet, are you?

[Alis]

agaace
Would'nt it be wonderful if your D40 clicked golden gate picture could be converted into a film negative? Film has infinite pixels! What an idea!!

How can it be infinite? I have heard it is around 160 MP.

[agaace]

Thanks Rob!

You're not giving up the day job yet, are you?

I'm considering My boss just announced he's leaving, and he's the best boss in the world.. I'll have my 5th boss in less than 3 years of work with my company. It would be actually cool to be my own boss *dreamer*

[PopsPhotos]

If possible, try to get a description of where it would be hung or, better, get a look at where it will be hung. I would suspect you will have no problem with that sized print, from what I've seen of your work. However there is the difference in the way most people view photographs and the way photographers view photographs.

The average person stands back from a print to a point that the entire print can be viewed. That gives them a view of the "picture." Photographers tend to walk up to a wall sized print and start looking for pixels to fuss with. That gives them a view of the "photograph."

Here is an example, shot with a D40. 40x60 inches from a 6MP camera.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/Images/jp..._1409-1200.jpg

Here is Ken's article about the picture. (Scroll down to February 02 and a little farther.)

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/2010-02.htm

I had a 16x20 hanging in a gallery for a few weeks and it didn't get much attention the first few days. I asked that it be moved to a portion of the wall behind a display case, to keep people from walking up and sticking their noses into the frame. Then it started getting noticed.

Back in about 1950, a friend of mine refused to sell a picture of Boulder Dam to the Boulder Dam Visitors' Center, because they were going to put it on an easel right at the entrance. When they agreed to move the display up and away from the viewers, he agreed to lend it to them without cost. Bill Belknap knew a bit about photography and how to properly view it.

Pops

[Colin Southern]

Hi Agata,

Relax -- I print images this size all the time -- nothing to be afraid of

- 12MP is more than adequate; I have images 22" x 44" taken with an 8MP camera and they're just fine too. Generally your images are only low to medium frequency (ie "not a lot of fine detail") which further lowers the MP requirements.

- As a genreal rule, the bigger the print, the more IMPACT it has - so it'll probably be a bit overwhelming when you first see it (don't worry, you get used to it!).

- Make sure you go over the ENTIRE image at 100% magnification - in particular looking for dust spots etc (be sure to re-check this after applying any levels adjustments).

- Do capture & content / creative sharpening -- you probably won't need output sharpening.

- The colourspace you output the final file in will depend on what the printer can handle - sRGB is safest (if in doubt etc!)

I'd be happy to check the files for you (or do some work on them for you) if it helps.

[timo2]

So I'm happy: someone wants to hang my pictures on their wall (they bought a new house, and want MY IMAGES on the walls, wow!!). But.. I've never printed my photos before.. I don't even have a calibrated screen yet (saving money.. had to prioritize other expenses first). And he wants one of my shots (the Golden Gate Bridge at night) at 90 x 60 cm, and two other shots at 40 x 30cm. I don't know how many megapixels my poor 40D makes, I think around 12MP.. do you think it's enough to print such big formats? Is there anything I should do to prepare my shots for big format prints? I don't know, more noise reduction, convert to a color profile (they are all sRGB), sharpen? Help! I feel like a baby lost in a forest..

If this is your first go at a large print, it may be a good idea to print a small sample to check your PP… After increasing the image size to the output dimensions you require, zoom in to 100% and crop out an A4 (letter) sized representative sample and print that at full size; it’ll highlight any problems. It’s not uncommon to find that images print darker than what you see onscreen.

[arith]

Excellent news; and I'm also impressed by the car pic pops posted. That is a silly size for a car pic though. If I was to do some printing, I wouldn't because I would want it done on photographic paper.

There are High st vendors who will do it at considerable cost but you could go online to get it done and get yourself a frame separately, just do a test print first to make sure that it isn't too dark. cheers

[dvp]

160 MP is what a digitizer may be able to digitze an analog negative (or more, depending on how sophisticated the digitizer is). The light collecting emulsion particle on film is very small (I shall have to look it up, it is either a nano or or 1000 nano range).
Discrete pixel depiction (the digital domain as we all know it) fails in creating accurate representation of analog domain/images. If one thinks about it, sound is the same (sound we hear is in the analog domain, but we try to digitally master it by creating discrete pieces of information). So, your 160 MP impression may be correct ut falls well short of infinity.

[agaace]

Thanks for all the advice!
Colin, I'll look for a place to print nearby, and search my hdd for the older shots, and will contact you to ask for help preparing it (I owe you a beer man!). Someone told me to make 1-2 100% crops, let's say poscard size (one with more detail and one with solid background), to have a look at how the final res would look like in the poster. I think that's a good idea!

[Colin Southern]

Thanks for all the advice!
Colin, I'll look for a place to print nearby, and search my hdd for the older shots, and will contact you to ask for help preparing it (I owe you a beer man!). Someone told me to make 1-2 100% crops, let's say poscard size (one with more detail and one with solid background), to have a look at how the final res would look like in the poster. I think that's a good idea!

No worries Agata,

Not a beer drinker though I'm afraid ... but I'm always open to that one thing that every man craves ...

... Mmmmm ... CHOCOLATE!

(just kidding)

PS: Doing 100% crops is of limited use in my opinion; if you've been making masks etc then you can just as easily check things at 100% on the screen - and with regards to resolution, it really doesn't matter; we photographers look at things close up, but "regular people" just look at the whole image from a distance. So up to you, but personally I don't bother (in fact if I've just re-profiled the printer then I go the other way and just dump the whole print onto something small (which means only 22" wide for me!) just to check the colours). Biggest issue you'll probably face is finding a printer who knows what they're doing ... it's not something that you can just take to the local photo shop for printing - you're best off using a specialty printer (one who can offer a choice of media, and actually understands what a printer profile is!).

[nycandre]

Agata - assuming they want a very good quality print to hang, maybe check prices at local printers - it might be worth letting a local pro shop do the whole retouching and printing - especially when you consider what the cost of framing alone will be. One advantage is you'll also have that retouched final digital file (and can use it for learning purposes). Doing print tests on your own while learning can be expensive.
Anyway - great shot, yes - could be a great postcard too. All the best and let us know how you end up doing that project.

André in NYC - http://www.flickr.com/photos/nycandre/

[benm]

You've gotten lots of good advice already. In my opinion I would ignore all the numbers being thrown around and make one print at the desired size. Hang it on your wall and make a decision then. Is it good enough for a client? If yes, you're good to go.

[PopsPhotos]

Check your PMs, Agata

Pops

[CNelson]

Here's a place not far from you...assuming you are in the SF Bay Area from the bridge photo. I've not used them but am thinking I will try them for a 12X46 print.

http://www.epingo.com/prints.aspx

Chuck

[agaace]

Thanks Chuck! Actually I live in Washington.. but the person who wants my prints lives in Bay Area. So I might end up sending my files to him so that he prints it himself..