|
skankers
Apr 15, 2009, 3:59 PM
Post #1 of 4
(2546 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 13, 2009
Posts: 12
|
I pushed my luck I thought when I ordered a large print as I remembered after ordering it that I had used my smaller 8 megapixel camera so it would not get soaked(mist trail) and the photo came today and the detail of the people on the bridge(my family group)was excellent, even though it was a 30 x 40 inch print, and the sensor was not that large(Olympus C8080). The optics on that lens were supposed to be excellent. I feel like I lucked out.
|
|
|
|
|
pico23
Apr 15, 2009, 4:24 PM
Post #2 of 4
(2528 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2003
Posts: 2378
|
so that is like a 37in diagonal?
Which means you should be viewing it from about 5-6 feet
8MP from a digital sounds about right at 100px per in. Assuming it was at low ISO and the original was sharp and blur free.
Actually the bigger you go the less pixel density is used .
So at 30x40 it's probably only using 100ppi at most.
The other thing subjective. I used to work at a print lab, and some people were happy blowing up a wallet sized print to a 20x30 poster. Looked horrible but they were happy. Others printed 110 film to 11x14 which again looked horrible but again they loved it. On the flip side I was at Peter Licks gallery in Las Vegas and while not every one of his $5000 images was flawless (and by flawless I mean various things including resolution and detail), there were quite a few 60+ in prints I could put my nose up to an not lose any detail.
|
|
|
|
|
marc801
Apr 15, 2009, 4:55 PM
Post #3 of 4
(2510 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2806
|
pico23 wrote: so that is like a 37in diagonal?
Remember the Pythagorean theorem?
Diagonal = SquareRoot((A squared)+(B squared))
|
|
|
|
|
pico23
Apr 15, 2009, 10:02 PM
Post #4 of 4
(2461 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2003
Posts: 2378
|
Yeah, I do now....not sure what the "F" i was thinking, but lets just say, it's probably not a good idea to post replies on a few hours of restless sleep.
Still the rest of the calculations hold true, he just gets a few extra feet of proper viewing distance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
