Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,338   Posts: 1,537,606   Online: 1017
      
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 21
  1. #1
    stradibarrius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Monroe, GA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,382
    Images
    163

    How much can a good photgraph be "blown up" ?

    When you print or scan your negatives and crop or enlarge, how much magnification should you images tolerate? 50%, 100%, 200%???
    "Generalizations are made because they are generally true"
    Flicker http://www.flickr.com/photos/stradibarrius
    website: http://www.dudleyviolins.com
    Barry
    Monroe, GA

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    237
    It depends on your intended viewing distance. For example, if you are enlarging for a billboard you can tolerate a very high magnification.

  3. #3
    Sirius Glass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Southern California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    13,107
    I have three 35 mm color negatives, 1"x1.5" that I had professionally enlarged to 24"x36". Two of the negatives have had two prints each made by different labs. At two or three inches grain can be seen if one looks really carefully.

    Will this work for every color negative, probably not. But then not every negative is worth blowing up 24 times.

    Steve
    Warning!! Handling a Hasselblad can be harmful to your financial well being!

    Nothing beats a great piece of glass!

    I leave the digital work for the urologists and proctologists.

  4. #4
    stradibarrius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Monroe, GA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,382
    Images
    163
    When you scan and view your shots on the computer at what percentage would you expect the image to "fall apart"?
    What I am trying to determine is how to evaluate my shots/negatives. For example if I look at a shot at at 100% crop should it still look good?
    I hope my question is making sense...I do understand that if the viewing distance is billboard distance at 2 feet the image would probably look like crap.
    "Generalizations are made because they are generally true"
    Flicker http://www.flickr.com/photos/stradibarrius
    website: http://www.dudleyviolins.com
    Barry
    Monroe, GA

  5. #5
    tjaded's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    San Francisco, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,018
    Images
    75
    While there may be "correct" sizes based on math or what not, I think the real answer is based solely in the eye pf the photographer. I helped print some 35mm tri-x negs to 9'x6' (yes, that is feet) and frankly, they looked amazing. Just my two cents.
    --------------------
    "Everytime I find a film or paper that I like, they discontinue it." -Paul Strand

    www.glasskeyphoto.com

  6. #6
    2F/2F's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,008
    Images
    4
    The way I was taught to use a scanner, scanning at over 100% quickly starts destroying "image quality". I always scan at 100%, and adjust other parameters (ppi, etc.) to fine tune the actual size of the image. If I ever needed it larger, I would upsample in a dedicated program like Genuine Fractals, not when I scan. However, I have never needed to scan at more than 100% at 4,000 ppi for a desired print.

    However, I'd ask at HybridPhoto.com, not here. You will get better answers and tick off fewer people.
    Last edited by 2F/2F; 09-10-2009 at 07:22 PM. Click to view previous post history.
    2F/2F

    "Truth and love are my law and worship. Form and conscience are my manifestation and guide. Nature and peace are my shelter and companions. Order is my attitude. Beauty and perfection are my attack."

    - Rob Tyner (1944 - 1991)

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Central NC
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    444
    Quote Originally Posted by stradibarrius View Post
    When you print or scan your negatives and crop or enlarge, how much magnification should you images tolerate? 50%, 100%, 200%???
    In general, modern emulsions can almost always take 10x enlargement. Slower and sharper films can take more.

    From a practical standpoint, much depends on the image, your technique, processing, etc. The more enlargement you use, the better your original has to be.
    Bruce Watson
    AchromaticArts.com

  8. #8
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Midwest USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,195
    Lets see, 50% would be a one- half reduction; thats OK. 100% would be a contact print. Thats OK also. 200% would be my favorite; that is a 16x20 from an 8x10 negative

    I occasionally enlarge Minox to 16x20. That would be 4600% and it the physical limit of my equipment.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Aurora, IL
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,953
    I don't understand your question very well Barry. I will take a guess. When I scan my negatives or slides, I hope to be able to view it at 100% and the image still looks good. Some of my images do but many don't look good at 100%. To view the whole image on my computer screen, although my monitor is 2048x1536, I have to view it at about 25 to 33%.

  10. #10
    Mark Fisher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Chicago
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,627
    Images
    151
    For maintaining good detail in a good negative at a close viewing distance could go to 8-10x. I've done images where those technical quality measures are pretty useless, I have a 35mm Tri-x neg of a horse that i enlarged to around 20x30. Printed it as lith and it worked out well, but it is a lot harder, I'm sticking to medium format and up for nor s that I don't need to deal with film flatness and tiny negatives, My current favorite seems to be a Hassy, I sometimes use LF, but the hassy gets all the good shoots. I'm actually thinking about dumping my Tachihara 90 and 150mm wit a bunch of holders.

    Bottom line - MF will suit most of your work unless you shoot a lot of architectural shots then it is the movements and not the film size.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin