Super-large enlargements

[Blue439]

The other day, I sold through eBay a ColorMunki Photo device to a guy on the other side of France, and he was apparently so happy with it that he insisted on printing out for me a very, very large print (60 × 90 centimeters). He said keeping his printer busy prevents the nozzles from clogging, which I can, to a certain extent, understand. he did not want me to pay for anything, paper, shipping costs, etc.

So, a couple days ago, I received this gigantic print and was first amazed by its quality, even when seen from a very short distance. Coming from a Nikon D810, shot hand held with no particular precaution, the result is quite astounding.

Then, however, I began to wonder: what is to be done with such an enormous enlargement? We have a big house, but the walls are already pretty much occupied by various paintings, and I'm not sure my (gorgeous, of course) photograph would really measure up... 

So, my question is, Do you print out very large prints, if so how often, and except for the purpose of an exhibition, what do you do with those gigantic prints?

[dgberg]

Call us crazy Americans but big is what sells. 24x36" is an average size for our printmaking studio.
Just did 84 of that size for a local hospital and that was the second batch.
Homes are also big here. Takes large prints to fill those walls.
Here are 4 in my master bed room the largest being 36X48" Local artists digital reproductions printed on canvas with Epson 9900
The 2 canvases on the bottom are attached to Dibond.

[Wayne Fox]

I guess "gigantic" is a relative term, because to me that is a rather smallish size print.  My test print size is 24x30  inches (60x76cm). The size you mention would fit comfortably in most homes, and in fact even over a typical living room sofa wouldn't look that big unless framed with an oversize frame.  The fact you are struggling to hang it might simply mean what  you already have on your walls you prefer over replacing it with this print. The challenge for some walls is whether to do a grouping of things you like or whether to dedicate the entire space to a single piece.

you are right, not everyone has a place to display large prints.  But those that can afford large prints usually have large homes with big walls (or several such homes), and thus have places to use even prints up to 7 or 8 feet.  Yes I print them and sell them, most of my images the minimum size is 45" on the long side, up to 85".

just for reference a snapshot from my most recent customer after hanging his 54" print in his front room (face mounted to a 60" piece of glass with a 3" clear border around the print and 2" frame so overall piece is about 64" long). Size looks about right to me.

[Geraldo Garcia]

That size (60x90cm) is our champion of sales and is considered "average" here too (Brazil), well suited for the no-so-big walls of a medium sized apartment. Our clients like to make multiples (diptych, triptych...) on that size as well. We start to call "big" around 80x120cm and our best selling "big" prints are 110x165cm. We have a client that makes beautiful panoramas that usually prints 110x240cm, that is gigantic in my opinion.

I guess it is a matter of approach on decoration, a few larger images instead of lots of smaller ones.

Regards.

[Rainer SLP]

Hi,

I just started making some Tryptich for myself and trying to get some customers for it.

Now that I have made my Printer is to small already 

All panels are 50 or 52cm ~20"  wide (due to the wooden frame on which I mount the canvas) and according to the motif up to 92cm long.

[Blue439]

It is indeed interesting to see that quite a few people on this forum are into photography as a profession, and must make a living out of it, with everything that it entails. I had not realized that, but it makes for interesting and different, more commercially-oriented, viewpoints that are not often expressed elsewhere.

I am of course not in that category, being strictly an amateur, in which I hope is the purest sense of the word, which comes from the Latin verb amare, that can be translated as "to be fond of" as well as, quite simply, "to love".

[GrahamBy]

I'm yet to print beyond A3+, and the results go into albums or a box. If you are selling them, great, but for personal display, supposing you make even one photo per week that is worth printing, you have to run out of space pretty fast... There are more of my prints in my office than at home, since there are more bare walls and more visitors!

And then for contrast, yesterday I visited the an exhibition(*) at the Jeu de Paume in Paris, one floor of which was given over to a photographer, Eli Lotar. The gallery insisted on displaying many of his prints in original format, somewhere around 10x12cm (4"x5"). I guess it satisfies the art-world fetish for original objects, but it was pretty unsatisfying visually. Most of the prints I found fairly ordinary, but there was a nice collection of portraits, which were rotated on a flat-screen in a corner of the gallery, displayed at around 35x50cm. That was something of a revelation.

(*) The exhibition open tomorrow... how my friend, her two children and I got into the pre-show reception without invitations and carrying too big a bag to be allowed through security was a fun adventure

[Peter McLennan]

Big is fun.  It's only recently that ordinary guys like me can make reeeeeely big prints. I frequently make them up to two meters in the long dimension.  The amateur in me "loves" it. They make me go "WOW!"  That's why I do it.

[stockjock]

I'm yet to print beyond A3+, and the results go into albums or a box. If you are selling them, great, but for personal display, supposing you make even one photo per week that is worth printing, you have to run out of space pretty fast... There are more of my prints in my office than at home, since there are more bare walls and more visitors!

I used to print primarily at 13x19" but I have found standardizing on 17x22" to be much more satisfying.  That is large enough to really show off most prints and still small enough to fit nicely into photo boxes.  Assuming you are printing on fairly heavy papers like the Canson Platine or Baryta the larger sized prints also handle well.  The cost of the larger paper is partially offset by being able to use roll paper.  I also find the aspect ratio of 17x22" paper to be more pleasing and natural and it discourages printing digital images at 1.5:1 which is fine for landscapes but less successful for most other subjects.  I only print larger that 17x22" when an image is going to be framed and displayed in an exhibition.  I do get a kick out of printing really large from time to time but handling and storing bigger prints is fairly impractical.