7 ms·

It all depends on how closely you're viewing them. We have a bunch of photos shot with a 5D (12MP) printed about four feet tall. They look great from a normal v

by jonah 16y ago

It all depends on how closely you're viewing them. We have a bunch of photos shot with a 5D (12MP) printed about four feet tall. They look great from a normal viewing distance. Of course, when you put your face six inches away, you can start to see some digital artifacts (stair stepping, etc.) but that's not a problem. The maximum necessary resolution is related to the intended viewing distance. "The standard definition of normal visual acuity (20/20 vision) is the ability to resolve a spatial pattern separated by a visual angle of one minute of arc." From that the maximum resolvable dot size can be calculated for a given viewing distance. http://www.ndt-ed.org/EducationResources/CommunityCollege/PenetrantTest/Introduction/visualacuity.htm http://www.ndt-ed.org/EducationResources/CommunityCollege/Pe... http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/eye-resolution.html http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/eye-resolution.html (Sidenote: billboards usually printed at around 20-30ppi)

stan_rogers 16y ago
20/20 is actually pretty bad eyesight. It's "normal vision", not perfect vision, and when my eyes are "corrected" to 20/20, they're about a quarter-diopter shy of maximal acuity. There is a huge difference to my eyes between pictures printed at a 200-line screen and one printed at a 150-line screen (all other things, like stock and varnish being equal) at a distance of more than one metre (from head-height on a couch to the magazine at the far end of a coffee table). If I were printing from a 12MP original at about four feet tall, I'd certainly run the source through something like Genuine Fractals Print Pro (even a good giclee pattern can't make up for squared-off curves). At four feet in the long dimension (giving a realistic viewing distance of about six feet) I'd notice raggedness at a glance at less than about 80ppi -- but then the dye clouds from a 4x5 negative printed at that size would drive me batty as well.

by jonah 16y ago

stan_rogers 16y ago

20/20 is actually pretty bad eyesight. It's "normal vision", not perfect vision, and when my eyes are "corrected" to 20/20, they're about a quarter-diopter shy of maximal acuity. There is a huge difference to my eyes between pictures printed at a 200-line screen and one printed at a 150-line screen (all other things, like stock and varnish being equal) at a distance of more than one metre (from head-height on a couch to the magazine at the far end of a coffee table). If I were printing from a 12MP original at about four feet tall, I'd certainly run the source through something like Genuine Fractals Print Pro (even a good giclee pattern can't make up for squared-off curves). At four feet in the long dimension (giving a realistic viewing distance of about six feet) I'd notice raggedness at a glance at less than about 80ppi -- but then the dye clouds from a 4x5 negative printed at that size would drive me batty as well.