Largest file size

[Mike W]

I'm wondering what's the largest file size (in inch or centimeters) you ever supplied a client with.
Also; for wich medium -> poster ads, magazines, other,....

Why the question? I'm wondering if most professional photographers really need a 39mpx back, Since a 22mpx covers most double page magazine spread at 300ppi.
Of course it's understandable that 39mpx backs are in use, I'm just wondering where and when the 39mpx advantage really kicks in.

what's your take?

[Don Libby]

Mike, I may have found a flaw in you logic.  Not all professional photographers have studios or shoot for a specific client.  What about those of us who shoot landscape and nature images?  I shoot with a 31.6 mpx back (Phase One P30+) and sometimes wish I had more.  IMHO there’s simply no better joy than to print a 30x60 of the Sequoia’s to make you feel like you’re actually walking in the forest (just sold a similar image).

I can’t answer your question regarding file size, as I don’t supply them to clients; what I do supply is finished artwork printed on canvas and the more mega pixels the better!

Cheers

don

[snickgrr]

I supplied for a wine client to go on their trucks an eight foot by 24 foot file.  72dpi.  They said it looked great and sent me some snappypoos of it but I never saw in person.  This was from a Nikon D1x.  Shot for that client again this past summer with the Leaf A75 but so far no requests from them for big files.
edit.  FYI.  I first ran the RAW file through Camera Raw and did the whole work-up on the file which involved quite a bit of time and the whole time I thought it looked like crap.  So I redid it through Iridient Raw Developer and wow, what a change.  Much better holding onto detail and colors were smoother.  Camera Raw was a bunch of mushy pixels, Iridient's was alive.

[G_Allen]

I shoot mainly fashion advertising. Most common file size for final, retouched art: 60x90cm @ 300ppi. The largest file I have been asked for was 320megs, 8bit -- I think that works out to a little over a meter high.

My buddies in the agencies say that the greatest file quality requirements are for duratrans POP posters, as they are normally quite large and viewed from close distances.

I once had a project that was originally slated to be a horizontal for magazines only that turned into a vertical for duratrans, bus stop, and buses after it had already been shot. I had shot it with a 1DsII, and the final art was of marginal quality at best after we took the vertical crop and interpolated it.

That project is the reason I bought a P30+. I was horrified to see the 1DsII file break down so quickly after around 120megs...

[Graham Mitchell]

I have supplied stitched files around 400-500MB (16 bit TIFF)

[Mike W]

Mike, I may have found a flaw in you logic.  Not all professional photographers have studios or shoot for a specific client.  What about those of us who shoot landscape and nature images?  I shoot with a 31.6 mpx back (Phase One P30+) and sometimes wish I had more.  IMHO there’s simply no better joy than to print a 30x60 of the Sequoia’s to make you feel like you’re actually walking in the forest (just sold a similar image).

I can’t answer your question regarding file size, as I don’t supply them to clients; what I do supply is finished artwork printed on canvas and the more mega pixels the better!

Cheers

don
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=159328\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I understand, that's why I made it a clear question to people who work client-orriented.
I think your situation represents that of most independent photographers.

[Mike W]

I shoot mainly fashion advertising. Most common file size for final, retouched art: 60x90cm @ 300ppi. The largest file I have been asked for was 320megs, 8bit -- I think that works out to a little over a meter high.

My buddies in the agencies say that the greatest file quality requirements are for duratrans POP posters, as they are normally quite large and viewed from close distances.

I once had a project that was originally slated to be a horizontal for magazines only that turned into a vertical for duratrans, bus stop, and buses after it had already been shot. I had shot it with a 1DsII, and the final art was of marginal quality at best after we took the vertical crop and interpolated it.

That project is the reason I bought a P30+. I was horrified to see the 1DsII file break down so quickly after around 120megs...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=159331\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

So what camera/digital back do you use now?

[Dustbak]

100MP (megapixel ) file for a big wall. Image of a bunch of glue tanks and a spray-nozzle.

I like the 39MP not just because of the sheer file size but I can work a bit more lazy with it because I can crop more (I know, you should always try to do your best but there are those days you know).

I also like it because I can downsize more and hide retouching errors which you could also translate in, I like to work faster which inherently almost always also means sloppier.

[JerryReed]

My response may not add to your decision making information, but the SINAR 54 H in the 16 shot mode routinely delivers a 500+ megabyte file, or about twice the pixel density of a Better Light scanning back; a point that I sometimes use when an artist says that she has been happy with results that she is getting from another giclée maker ..."because his file size is so very large."

What would the file sizes be if the 75 H LV could work out the micro-stepper function and deliver 16- shot quality like its little brother.  His eyes glaze over in dream...

Jerry Reed

[Mike W]

Just to point out, this tread is not about a purchase decision;
I'm just curious if people find the 39mpx ceiling limiting in any way.

Personally, I'm hoping new, higher pixel-count backs will hit the market...but only so 39mpx back prices will be pushed down.

Anyone waiting for the 80mpx back? Or do we hate even larger files? :-)

[marc gerritsen]

I supply all my clients regardles with 111mb tiff files and smaller ones of course.
The biggest file I submitted was recently and it was 350mb for six 2.4mx3.5m portraits

[Mike W]

jeez...do your client need those kind of files? Or is it meant to razzle dazzle them :-)

[marc gerritsen]

95 % dont need any of those but if they need them they have them to print large display photos
or easily cover double page spreads with even a serious crop.
Anyway it is always easy to down-res as supposed to up-res.

[pfigen]

I've given clients 4000 ppi drum scans from 4X5 Provia destined for very large mural type prints. The scans were approximately 915 mb 8bpc.

[andybuk99]

I give all my clients the maximum resolution with my Aptus 65 (160mb 16bit tiff). Thats because I know when the file leaves me it is the best possible condition, then if they want to "fiddle" with it they can.

[geotzo]

Most files I have supplied clients with are 8-11mpxls mainly on fashion and product catalogue work, some of which have been printed on huge billboards as you can't really tell from such a distance. Unless you are printing images on a digital printer of any kind, or on a very high quality press, I really find no reason to use higher res for anything that goes to normal 4color web presses (90% of my work ends there). But that's just me and my work. When I do personal artwork I may demand higher res for large digital prints.
George