Largeformat Printing-DSLR or Film

[kayoy]

Greetings from a newbie. Also posted this on DSLR Forum. Really need help.

I'm getting started with product photography.

My background is printing. It's funny that I never got into the photography side of my clients art/files.

My brother and I are teaming up to try and produce pictures for some clients. Mainly jewelry footwear and some clothing, so we need respectable details.These will be enlarged to 12 X 18, 24 X 36, 36 X 48 inches. Output on Largeformat HPDesignjet 5000 and Epson Stylus Pro 9000, CMYK, lclm printers. We need the images at 300 dpi.

Just as we were getting ready to set up with 35mm and medium format(we haven't bought much yet, we do have a Canon 35mm SLR, a macro and wide angle lens-all EFs, and of course we're on a tight budget), we ran in to someone who is all praises for Digital. Now we're torn, confused, apprehensive and a bit scared on which path to take.

Question: Can a 20D match or come close to image quality of Velvia 50, 100 (preferably drum scanned) when printed at these sizes.

Although out of our price range, can the EOS-1DS Mark II hit a homerun with these requirements. Of course, the 20D is all we can afford right now if we go digital.

Your expert opinion is greatly appreciated and respected.

Thanks,
Carol

[another view]

Hi and welcome to the site. We'd prefer that you didn't duplicate threads into other forums though.

I have a feeling that if you ask 10 different people, you'll get 11 different answers about this. My opinion? Comparing 35mm to a 20D, it would be a 20D hands down. Medium format results will be closer, but of course each has it's own pros/cons to consider.

Your print sizes are huge, and are you sure you need 300dpi? Off the top of my head I don't know if MF digital backs can do this without interpolation (at about the price of a nice car, btw).

With digital, the "infrastructure" is expensive. This is a fast computer, image editing and RAW conversion software (like Photoshop CS2), monitor calibration (I think it's necessary), memory cards, etc. But with good technique all the way around, you'll get files that can make incredibly detailed large prints - easily 20"x30", probably more. A big advantage is that there can be as many original files as you want - just burn another disc.

If you have a good lab that does E6 processing (they're getting harder to find all the time) then maybe MF is a consideration. Downsides are cost, the fact that you'll have only one original (until you scan it, anyway), time waiting for film to be processed and scanned (or time and cost of having a scanner), and the possibility of having to use CC filters (may not be required - but not a factor with digital). MF gear can be had pretty inexpensively these days, check out decent used Mamiya RZ67's and you might be surprised.

[kayoy]

Thanks anotherview.

Sorry about the double post. Wasn't sure which forum was appropriate.

We were really excited about the savings on cost and legwork with the 20D.
Just really concerned about the clear quality of the images at large outputs.
I know that at 12 X 18 digital is HANDS DOWN the winner.

Regarding 300dpi, since the print output isn't continuous tone, plus the fact that the pieces will be displayed at eye level, we think it is really necessary. 200 or below just wont cut it.

Thanks again

[berrywise]

Printing a 36 X 48 at 300 DPI. That's asking quite a lot out of a 20D. I would be thinking more along the lines of a 4x5 camera at that point. Is the image going to take up the whole space or will you be doing some layout, other graphics etc that will be filling in some of that space?

[kayoy]

Great question Berrywise.

There will be some layout elements. Mainly text. Since these are retail posters (internal and window), they would need to be readable from at leat 50 to 100 feet. That means Type that is at least 7 to 10 inches tall (taken from either side but NEVER simultaniously). So effectively, the image, SOME of which will be cut out or dopped out with effects like shadows, etc., will be 36 X 38-40 or 26-30 X 48 inches.

Can the 20D still effectively achieve this (We're crossing our fingers)?

Once again (although we still out of the budget) what about the EOS-1DS Mark II.

You will notice that we're rooting for digital.

Thanks again,
Carol

[drg]

Greetings from a newbie. Also posted this on DSLR Forum. Really need help.

I'm getting started with product photography.

My background is printing. It's funny that I never got into the photography side of my clients art/files.

My brother and I are teaming up to try and produce pictures for some clients. Mainly jewelry footwear and some clothing, so we need respectable details.These will be enlarged to 12 X 18, 24 X 36, 36 X 48 inches. Output on Largeformat HPDesignjet 5000 and Epson Stylus Pro 9000, CMYK, lclm printers. We need the images at 300 dpi.

Just as we were getting ready to set up with 35mm and medium format(we haven't bought much yet, we do have a Canon 35mm SLR, a macro and wide angle lens-all EFs, and of course we're on a tight budget), we ran in to someone who is all praises for Digital. Now we're torn, confused, apprehensive and a bit scared on which path to take.

Question: Can a 20D match or come close to image quality of Velvia 50, 100 (preferably drum scanned) when printed at these sizes.

Although out of our price range, can the EOS-1DS Mark II hit a homerun with these requirements. Of course, the 20D is all we can afford right now if we go digital.

Your expert opinion is greatly appreciated and respected.

Thanks,
Carol

Hi,

A few random notes to start -

I would ask how you've printed large photo/artwork in the non-digital past? If you are used to camera ready artwork, that is a whole different ballgame as opposed than doing all your own prepress image prep. What quantity of each are you printing?

There's always tweaking involved and adjustments ranging from white balance to color matching. If you're used to preparing artwork and understand the requirements of your final process regarding resizing,display, registration, separation, bleeds, etc. then it will ease the digital transition, else there's learnin' in them hills ahead.

The 20d is a fine Camera. It's a camera, not a pre-press engine. Its close but you'd be better to take its RAW files and adjust them after the fact with ICC profiles or even go the AdobeRGB formats(more time, more time).

Straight out of the camera for something works up to certain sizes and then "stuff" can happen like you'll start to see artifacts in the oddest places. RAW and something like PhaseOne software or some of "Fractal" software will give you MUCH better results. There's also some various proprietary Electronic Pre-Press software tools depending upon your production flow or the that of the final shops offset reqs.

The 20d images are going to look very different from Velvia. So are the Mark II by the way. You are not going to have super-saturated color without doing a lot of work on the images. Or just turning up all the controls on the 20d will get you part of the way there. The 20d will exceed film. except in very capable hands, every time. Plus no grain which at these sizes is a big issue (no pun intended).

On the matter of dpi, cameras don't produce dpi, they produce pixels. The size of the print dictates the size of the file Pixels/inches=dpi. The pixel count can be changed (the business about software, pre-press, and so on) via resizing. Then you get to fun stuff with contrast and sharpenening and various adjustments. There's also color noise (a real bug for us for a few months when we started). There's software to deal with all of this, and now most of it very successfully.

Have you been to workshops about digital printing, photography, workflow? Else hire a temp graphic designer/artist/prepress person or two for a month or so and pick their brain or find someone you can work with for a few weeks. If you've got time to play it helps!

I'll stop rambling and try to address more of this later if you would like?

[kayoy]

WOW! I knew we came to the right site. Very insightful DRG and great posts by eveyone.

Our hearts are starting to beat. It may sound unwise to some, but we really want to launch and go one path-Digital or Film, and have FULL CONVICTION with the format we choose.

Again, we're rooting for Digital.

Cost, legwork, volume of work and we're clearly seeing that at the Traditional/ Generic work we do in the offset/large format digital printing industry, meaning Postcard sizes, to 8.5 X 11 magazines and 12 X 18, almost every picture we get is shot digitally.

More importantly, I always subscribe to Victor Hugo's "There is one thing stronger than all the armies in the world, and that is an idea whose time has come."

More and more and with each passing day, DIGITAL seems to be IT.

Our BIGGEST CONCERN remains the enlargements at 40 plus inches. Quality and pixelization. But again, if I am undestanding everyone correctly, this can be fixed. Just a matter of skill and information.

By the way, we were ready to go with the film to digital route until the digital bug whispered in our ear and is slowly sweeping us of our feet.

To answer your question DRG, we used to drum scan (Creo) slides through a service bureau, this, as you well know, can be very expensive. Photoshop, run them them through RIP, output. Largeformat digital runs for less than 50 posters and of course if it is larger than 40 inches. Higher quantities (thousands) are run offset litho-largest offset machine only goes 40 inches.

So far, no one has knocked digital against film and if I am understanding every post correctly, the 20D can do the job.

[kayoy]

Most encouraging quote so far:

" The 20d will exceed film. except in very capable hands, every time. Plus no grain which at these sizes is a big issue (no pun intended).

On the matter of dpi, cameras don't produce dpi, they produce pixels. The size of the print dictates the size of the file Pixels/inches=dpi. The pixel count can be changed (the business about software, pre-press, and so on) via resizing...."
-drg

[berrywise]

I couldn't tell you whether or not a 20D could print that big because I haven't tried it myself. Maybe find a way to get a full sized RAW 20D image and give it a shot before investing?

[another view]

they would need to be readable from at leat 50 to 100 feet

This really makes me think that 300dpi is overkill. I read once what the resolution was that billboards are printed at and it's a surprisingly low number. Move 100'+ away from them and you'd have no idea.

If they're not being printed like a traditional photograph, I wonder if the difference between, say, 180dpi and 300dpi is even noticable. I'm not sure about this, but I'd say a trial print is definately in order here.

If you truly need 36x48 at 300dpi, that's a huge file size - really. And one thing to consider is that pixels ain't pixels; to my eye it takes a lower number of pixels to create a print from digital capture versus scanned film. So, as mentioned, maybe 4x5 is worth considering (and add an Imacon scanner for several thousand or so).

However, I've seen 20x30 prints taken with Nikon's 4mp D2H which looked very nice at a normal viewing distance (maybe 3'). This wouldn't be my first choice if I wanted to make a living off highly detailed prints of this size but again, the viewing distance really needs to be considered. BTW, this works out to under 85dpi.

[kayoy]

Very Interesting.

You're right, trial prints are definitely the next step. I wonder if there are shops that will let us use their 20D RAW files. I'll have to ask around

Thanks for your input. Will let you know how they turn out.

[kayoy]

" And one thing to consider is that pixels ain't pixels; to my eye it takes a lower number of pixels to create a print from digital capture versus scanned film."

This is also very enlightening. If so, then it shouldn't be that tough to get to my sizes.