Posted by Reed Bowman on April 21, 2010 at 10:51 PM
I've been approached by a local gallery for 5 16 x 24 gliclee prints. I shoot RAW with the Nikon D200. What is the best procedure for getting the best quality images at this size? Can I just use the image size functions in Photoshop and use the bicubic smoother for enlargments? What other steps should I take to ensure best quality?
Reed,
If you are printing them yourself on a large format printer i suggest you get Q-image. (it really is the best $90 i have ever spent on software)
If you are sending them out to be printed in a lab i would contact them and ask what they
usually do. if the lab wants you to uprez the files yourself i would go with either genuine fractals or Alien skin blow up both of those will give far superior results than the image size function of photoshop.
As a final step you should make sure that they are properly sharpened after you uprezzed them.
".. i would go with either genuine fractals or Alien skin blow up both of those will give far superior results than the image size function of photoshop."
This simply isn't true for smaller enlargements like the ones you wish to produce with an image from a 10MP DSLR.
The Image Size function (Bicubic Smoother) is perfectly capable of producing a fine 16 x 24 enlargement from a top quality image file.
John,
keep in mind that for the best print quality you need to uprez to the printers native resolution.
For the canon LF printers this is 600dpi, which makes rezzing up from a 10mp camera to a 24x16 print around a 400% increase, which is quite substantial.
I've done my own comparisons when i got my printer (iPF6200) and there are definitely differences in an image printed at its native resolution compared to a 300dpi.
Anyway, if printing from a lab its almost always best to contact them and ask for there specs.
a good lab should be able to help you as to what's steps to take to get the best result on their printers.
Wim.
Posted by David Bostedo on April 22, 2010 at 2:19 PM
Here's a good, technical comparison and summary of the results between various enlargements done with Blowup, Genuine Fractals, and PS.
The conclusion? Which was best varied largely between subject matter and how big an enlargement you were making (with PS Bicubic better at some very large enlargements).
In my opinion, the "better" is pretty subjective, too, and I would say the differences were more in terms of a preferred look than any real improvements in detail or texture between the three. I personally wouldn't bother with anything but PS unless I frequently was making lots of enlargements that I knew another program would handle better. But I don't send out for prints very often, and large ones very rarely.
(For my own printing at home up to 13x19, I DO use Qimage, and have been very happy with it's upsizing to my printer's native - 600ppi - resolution.)
Discussion
4 repliesThanks for any advise
If you are printing them yourself on a large format printer i suggest you get Q-image. (it really is the best $90 i have ever spent on software)
If you are sending them out to be printed in a lab i would contact them and ask what they
usually do. if the lab wants you to uprez the files yourself i would go with either genuine fractals or Alien skin blow up both of those will give far superior results than the image size function of photoshop.
As a final step you should make sure that they are properly sharpened after you uprezzed them.
Wim
The Image Size function (Bicubic Smoother) is perfectly capable of producing a fine 16 x 24 enlargement from a top quality image file.
keep in mind that for the best print quality you need to uprez to the printers native resolution.
For the canon LF printers this is 600dpi, which makes rezzing up from a 10mp camera to a 24x16 print around a 400% increase, which is quite substantial.
I've done my own comparisons when i got my printer (iPF6200) and there are definitely differences in an image printed at its native resolution compared to a 300dpi.
Anyway, if printing from a lab its almost always best to contact them and ask for there specs.
a good lab should be able to help you as to what's steps to take to get the best result on their printers.
Wim.
It's Bigger, But Is It Better?
It's Bigger, But Is It Better? Part II
It's Bigger, But Is It Better? Part III
The conclusion? Which was best varied largely between subject matter and how big an enlargement you were making (with PS Bicubic better at some very large enlargements).
In my opinion, the "better" is pretty subjective, too, and I would say the differences were more in terms of a preferred look than any real improvements in detail or texture between the three. I personally wouldn't bother with anything but PS unless I frequently was making lots of enlargements that I knew another program would handle better. But I don't send out for prints very often, and large ones very rarely.
(For my own printing at home up to 13x19, I DO use Qimage, and have been very happy with it's upsizing to my printer's native - 600ppi - resolution.)