Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1

    ByzantineRemnant's Avatar
    Member Since
    Dec 15, 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    614
    Specs:
    MacPro, MBP C2D, iMac G4
    Quick question...
    Hi,
    Im sure this has been answered before...

    If I have a 2048x1538 resolution picture and I want to print it on photo paper, how large can I make the picture and still be at 35mm quality?

    I called Kinkos and the lady said 36" wide, which I know is way too big. I would imagine somewhere around an 8x10, right?

    Thank you in advance.

  2. #2

    cazabam's Avatar
    Member Since
    Jun 06, 2006
    Posts
    1,153
    Specs:
    MacBook 2.0GHz White, 512MB RAM, 60GB HDD
    The rule of thumb is 300dpi. This would put your 2048 image at just under 7 inches wide, putting the maximum size at that quality at a 7x5 print.

    On the other hand, if you want to make an enlargement you could probably safely go to a 10x8 without noticing too much drop in quality, depending on the overall quality of the image (e.g. a high ISO grainy image wouldn't scale as well as a crisp, clean image with good focus and low ISO). You'd still be getting 200dpi.

    At 36" wide you'd only get 56dpi, which is less than a computer screen which generally runs between 75 and 120dpi.

  3. #3

    sarahsboy18's Avatar
    Member Since
    Jan 30, 2005
    Location
    Fort Worth, Texas
    Posts
    1,069
    Specs:
    Mac Pro, 8-Core 2.8Ghz, 10GB RAM, 2x1TB HDDs, iPod U2 Edition
    Quote Originally Posted by cazabam
    At 36" wide you'd only get 56dpi, which is less than a computer screen which generally runs between 75 and 120dpi.
    Which is would still actually be a comparable grain/resolution to 35mm at that size... Now, would it look like a magazine up close? No... but it would still look pretty good framed and on the wall like most picture that size would be.

    It's the same way a billboard could lower than 1/dpi. It all depends on the use.
    "If you had a friend who was a tightrope walker, and you were walking down a sidewalk, and he fell, that would be completely unacceptable." -Mitch Hedberg

  4. #4

    ByzantineRemnant's Avatar
    Member Since
    Dec 15, 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    614
    Specs:
    MacPro, MBP C2D, iMac G4
    So I would be in good shape making a 2048x1536 resolution picture into a framed photo on my wall? I consider 35mm pretty good quality; is this correct?

  5. #5

    sarahsboy18's Avatar
    Member Since
    Jan 30, 2005
    Location
    Fort Worth, Texas
    Posts
    1,069
    Specs:
    Mac Pro, 8-Core 2.8Ghz, 10GB RAM, 2x1TB HDDs, iPod U2 Edition
    Quote Originally Posted by Greenredfield
    So I would be in good shape making a 2048x1536 resolution picture into a framed photo on my wall? I consider 35mm pretty good quality; is this correct?
    Yeah... I'd say so...
    "If you had a friend who was a tightrope walker, and you were walking down a sidewalk, and he fell, that would be completely unacceptable." -Mitch Hedberg

  6. #6


    Member Since
    May 30, 2006
    Posts
    205
    Specs:
    iMac 20" core duo 2ghz; OS-X 10.4.7; 2gbram; 256mb graphics; 250gbHD; delivered 6/14/06
    Quote Originally Posted by Greenredfield
    If I have a 2048x1538 resolution picture and I want to print it on photo paper, how large can I make the picture and still be at 35mm quality?
    I've gone to 16 x 20 with good results. However, keep in mind enlargements of that size are viewed from some distance -- 35mm's break up, too, at that size. If you're talking about 8x10 / 8 1/2x11 / 8x12 etc -- typical enlargement sizes -- I think you'll be very satisfied. Close enough to spend the money once to find out, in any event.

  7. #7

    Odin_aa's Avatar
    Member Since
    Jul 07, 2005
    Location
    North Boston, NY
    Posts
    604
    Specs:
    PowerMac G5 2.3 ghz 6.5 GB ram 20" cinema display ..15" Macbook Pro 2.33 Core 2 Duo 2 Gig RAM
    You also dont really need to print at 300 dots per inch, you can resize the photograph to around 225 or 250 dpi which when printed would look almost identical to the 300 dpi image.

    You have an approximate 3mpx image and your question is comparing to 35mm. I have always read that 6mpx images are considered to have about the same resolution/quality of a 35mm film. With technology being what it is however you can upsize the image with little to no loss in quality.

    Edited to add:
    Also mentioned above is the "viewing distance", large photographs are meant to be viewed from specific distances. If you hold an 12x18 image 3 inches from your face it will not look the same as hanging it on the wall and viewing from 6 feet. Too many people will inspect an inlargement inches from their face, however unless it is being judged that really is too high an expectation.
    http://www.lightcafe.net

    New servers, much faster than before

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Quick Quick question about shopping on ebay?
    By srgthunder in forum Apple Notebooks
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 07-19-2007, 12:09 AM
  2. A very quick question
    By kaz2550 in forum Switcher Hangout
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-29-2007, 07:26 AM
  3. Quick Question
    By scdsteffes in forum Apple Notebooks
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-03-2007, 04:26 PM
  4. quick ip question
    By deus_ex_machina in forum Internet, Networking, and Wireless
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-27-2006, 12:30 AM
  5. Quick Question
    By myMac in forum Switcher Hangout
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 07-24-2006, 01:48 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •