I shoot with a Nikon D700 (12 megapixels), and I'm evaluating an image for printing and I'm interested in making a 30 X 45 print.
I will likely have it printed by Aspen Creek Photo so I would be uploading a JPEG file through their software.
I have made a duplicate of my master file and resized the image to 30 X 45 at a print resolution of 240 pixels / inch in Photoshop using bicubic smoother sampling. From the D700 this results in an image resolution of 10820 X 7200 pixels. I have adjusted the image size on screen so that 1 inch on the ruler grid in Photoshop is equal to 1 actual inch. However, as expected adding the pixels in photoshop results in a softer image.
When I view the original master file at the native resolution of the D700 at actual pixels it approximates the same size on screen as the resized image at 30 X 45 (based on what I actually see on my monitor not by the rulers on the grid in Photoshop) but the image has much better clarity and detail than the resized image. I know I can add more sharpening to the resized image but it still doesn't match what I see when viewing the original image at actual pixels.
The questions that I have are:
1. When I view the image at the native resolution with actual pixels and I see that it is approximately the same size on screen as the image that has been resized to 30X45 as described above does this translate to the print or is it just a property of how it is viewed in Photoshop?
2. Is it really necessary to resize the image in Photoshop to the print size before uploading it to Aspen Creek (maybe this is a question for them)?
Also, any other input that you have in sizing images for print would be welcome.
I appreciate all of your help,
Brian Schrayer
Posted by David Bostedo on March 23, 2012 at 8:39 AM
Brian - I haven't made prints that big, but for things up to 16x20, I find the 50% view on Photoshop is pretty good as an approximation for print sharpness as long as the PPI is decent (which 240 certainly would be). The issue with making 1 physical inch on your screen equal an actual inch in the image is that 1 physical inch of your screen doesn't have the same resolution as a print.
As far as the resizing, I would definitely let the printer driver/rip (whatever Aspen Creek uses) do the up-sizing for the final output. A lot of people recommend up-sizing to the printer's native resolution, and it's not a bad idea. But newer drivers and RIPs have gotten so good that I don't think it's worth doing. You might want to ask Aspen Creek what they recommend - original resolution, upsized to the printer native, or something in between like you're creating currently.
Posted by Taylor Reed on March 30, 2012 at 11:45 AM
I've always had good results with my prints from Aspen by up-sizing my files to whatever size I'm printing at using Bi-cubic smoother at 300 ppi and then sharpening using Nik's Sharpener using settings for continuous @ 300 ppi. I've never tried letting them resize it for me so I can't comment on it, but the detail has always been so excellent using my method I've never felt the need to.
One thing I didn't know about is that ROES converts files to sRGB. I had been submitting files as AdobeRGB and noticed the colors weren't quite matching, so take that into consideration - I now convert to sRGB and make any further adjustments myself since that tends to affect saturation and the prints are very close to what I see on screen.
I make huge enlargements for myself and clients for a living (at least a big chunk of it).
Size up using PS Bicubic Smoother (best in the business).
I would find out what resolution the printer can print at. As an example my printer (Lightjet) can take a 200 or a 300ppi image specifically.
In your case and at your size, for a 12 MP image, I would compromise and keep the ppi to the 200 ish range.
When images are in the 200ppi or lower range they are best be viewed at 50%. A lot of folks don't know this, but when they are in the 300ppi or higher range they are best viewed at 25%.
Sharpening is a science! If you know nothing about the science, and the image has a lot of fine detail, just use PS USM on a luminosity layer and maybe try this: Have Amount to 500, Radius VARIOUS, and don't use Threshold (O). Start with Rradius at 0.2 and slowly ease it up one increment at a time. Once the image looks perfect to the eye, maybe take it one additional increment (just a tad too sharp).
Flatten the image.
Convert to whatever color space they want it in. And bit depth last.
Discussion
3 repliesI will likely have it printed by Aspen Creek Photo so I would be uploading a JPEG file through their software.
I have made a duplicate of my master file and resized the image to 30 X 45 at a print resolution of 240 pixels / inch in Photoshop using bicubic smoother sampling. From the D700 this results in an image resolution of 10820 X 7200 pixels. I have adjusted the image size on screen so that 1 inch on the ruler grid in Photoshop is equal to 1 actual inch. However, as expected adding the pixels in photoshop results in a softer image.
When I view the original master file at the native resolution of the D700 at actual pixels it approximates the same size on screen as the resized image at 30 X 45 (based on what I actually see on my monitor not by the rulers on the grid in Photoshop) but the image has much better clarity and detail than the resized image. I know I can add more sharpening to the resized image but it still doesn't match what I see when viewing the original image at actual pixels.
The questions that I have are:
1. When I view the image at the native resolution with actual pixels and I see that it is approximately the same size on screen as the image that has been resized to 30X45 as described above does this translate to the print or is it just a property of how it is viewed in Photoshop?
2. Is it really necessary to resize the image in Photoshop to the print size before uploading it to Aspen Creek (maybe this is a question for them)?
Also, any other input that you have in sizing images for print would be welcome.
I appreciate all of your help,
Brian Schrayer
As far as the resizing, I would definitely let the printer driver/rip (whatever Aspen Creek uses) do the up-sizing for the final output. A lot of people recommend up-sizing to the printer's native resolution, and it's not a bad idea. But newer drivers and RIPs have gotten so good that I don't think it's worth doing. You might want to ask Aspen Creek what they recommend - original resolution, upsized to the printer native, or something in between like you're creating currently.
One thing I didn't know about is that ROES converts files to sRGB. I had been submitting files as AdobeRGB and noticed the colors weren't quite matching, so take that into consideration - I now convert to sRGB and make any further adjustments myself since that tends to affect saturation and the prints are very close to what I see on screen.
Size up using PS Bicubic Smoother (best in the business).
I would find out what resolution the printer can print at. As an example my printer (Lightjet) can take a 200 or a 300ppi image specifically.
In your case and at your size, for a 12 MP image, I would compromise and keep the ppi to the 200 ish range.
When images are in the 200ppi or lower range they are best be viewed at 50%. A lot of folks don't know this, but when they are in the 300ppi or higher range they are best viewed at 25%.
Sharpening is a science! If you know nothing about the science, and the image has a lot of fine detail, just use PS USM on a luminosity layer and maybe try this: Have Amount to 500, Radius VARIOUS, and don't use Threshold (O). Start with Rradius at 0.2 and slowly ease it up one increment at a time. Once the image looks perfect to the eye, maybe take it one additional increment (just a tad too sharp).
Flatten the image.
Convert to whatever color space they want it in. And bit depth last.
Hope it helps.