Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: 5d mk 3 - enlargement question  (Read 16098 times)

mstevensphoto

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 448
    • Denver Commercial Photographer
5d mk 3 - enlargement question
« on: March 27, 2012, 07:14:58 pm »

Hi All,
   For anyone who has their paws on a 5d3 I'm curious to know if you've done any very large format output? Given that there's no real resolution bump but the pixels that are captured are supposed to be somehow "better" I'm very curious if anyone can share experiences with big enlargements (not so much screen peeping, but actual printing)?
thanks!
Mark
Logged

Tony Jay

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2965
Re: 5d mk 3 - enlargement question
« Reply #1 on: March 27, 2012, 07:21:03 pm »

I have the Mark III but haven't shot much with it yet.

However, I am confidently expecting excellent results with a single image at at least A2 size.
Time will tell though.

Regards

Tony Jay
Logged

mstevensphoto

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 448
    • Denver Commercial Photographer
Re: 5d mk 3 - enlargement question
« Reply #2 on: March 27, 2012, 08:24:01 pm »

perhaps I should clarify...I'm looking at 40x60 or even larger, single image no stitching.
Logged

Ellis Vener

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2151
    • http://www.ellisvener.com
Re: 5d mk 3 - enlargement question
« Reply #3 on: March 27, 2012, 11:09:28 pm »

Haven't printed that large with my 5Dmk3  full frame photos yet or even a cropped section to that scale. I'm sure you realize diferent methods of printing will yield different results.
Logged

mstevensphoto

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 448
    • Denver Commercial Photographer
Re: 5d mk 3 - enlargement question
« Reply #4 on: March 27, 2012, 11:59:17 pm »

I'm aware that different methods will result in different results. I currently have two needs, 1) billboards....I used to do these on a 11mp camera with no problem as they're being printed at such a low dpi and viewed from so far away, clients do however ask for higher and higher resolution files. 2) artwork for display. the viewing distance on these pieces is often quite close and almost always coming out of my ipf8300. I've just done a 82" piece from the 5dII which produces very nice results, but nowhere near as lovely as the new nikon samples I've seen at similar size - at the same iso under the same circumstances. Pixelation and grain start to creep in at those sizes, standing 12 feet away one won't notice, but this is for display in an office lobby where viewers have the opportunity to walk right up to it and the "regular" viewing distance appears to be about 4 feet.
I'm fairly sold on the 5d3 just for the updated focus system, but wondering if I'll really get a much better image, specifically for enlarging, than the II.
Logged

Tony Jay

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2965
Re: 5d mk 3 - enlargement question
« Reply #5 on: March 28, 2012, 12:06:08 am »

It will take a while for me to be doing any serious printing using images from the 5D3.
Waiting for an update from Adobe that allows LR to recognize 5D3 images.
Not at all sold on Canon conversion software.

Regards

Tony jay
Logged

Josh-H

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2079
    • Wild Nature Photo Travel
Re: 5d mk 3 - enlargement question
« Reply #6 on: March 28, 2012, 02:15:08 am »

perhaps I should clarify...I'm looking at 40x60 or even larger, single image no stitching.


I have printed a lot of images this size 40 x 60 from my 1DS MKIII from single frames - no stitching. The results have been excellent. I have four prints on display this size at my current exhibition in Brighton at Source Photographica. The 5D MKIII should be able to do at least as good as the 1DS MKIII in this regard.
Logged
Wild Nature Photo Travel

Tony Jay

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2965
Re: 5d mk 3 - enlargement question
« Reply #7 on: March 28, 2012, 02:23:21 am »

That is good to know.

Of interest what was the resolution at that size (40X60)?

Regards

Tony Jay
Logged

Bart_van_der_Wolf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8913
Re: 5d mk 3 - enlargement question
« Reply #8 on: March 28, 2012, 10:45:46 am »

Of interest what was the resolution at that size (40X60)?

Hi Tony,

That would equate to 96 PPI for the 5D3, and 93.6 PPI for the 5D2 when printed full frame.
There would not be much of a visible difference in resolution, maybe somewhat cleaner regarding noise.

At these low resolutions one could visibly benefit from superior upsampling and sharpening techniques. A program like Photozoom Pro can add(!) resolution if the subject matter in the image offers that opportunity.

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
== If you do what you did, you'll get what you got. ==

Ellis Vener

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2151
    • http://www.ellisvener.com
Re: 5d mk 3 - enlargement question
« Reply #9 on: March 28, 2012, 02:50:32 pm »

Regarding input vs output resolution, Jeff Schewe's article in Digital Photo Pro is very informative. the link is http://www.digitalphotopro.com/technique/workflow/the-right-resolution
Logged

Josh-H

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2079
    • Wild Nature Photo Travel
Re: 5d mk 3 - enlargement question
« Reply #10 on: March 28, 2012, 05:13:43 pm »

Quote
At these low resolutions one could visibly benefit from superior upsampling and sharpening techniques.

Yes, I should have added the importance of quality up sampling and sharpening is critical to the end result.
Logged
Wild Nature Photo Travel

Tony Jay

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2965
Re: 5d mk 3 - enlargement question
« Reply #11 on: March 28, 2012, 06:31:53 pm »

Yes indeed!

My question really ought to read: what is the native resolution prior to appropriate processing (upsampling).

Nonetheless thanks for filling in the answer to the unwritten question.

Tony Jay
Logged

Ellis Vener

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2151
    • http://www.ellisvener.com
Re: 5d mk 3 - enlargement question
« Reply #12 on: March 28, 2012, 09:26:02 pm »

Yes indeed!

My question really ought to read: what is the native resolution prior to appropriate processing (upsampling).

Nonetheless thanks for filling in the answer to the unwritten question.

Tony Jay

The native image resolution for the 5D Mark III at 40 x 60 inch output is 96 ppi.

In the article I posted a link to in my last post Schewe suggests that, when printing from Lightroom 3 (presumably in Lr4 as well), any image  that at a given print size has a native resolution of lower than 360ppi should be up-rezzed in Lr3 's print module to 360ppi for Epson printers and 300 for Canon and similar printers. Conversely if the native resolution is above 360 at a given output size, for prints made on an Epson, uprez to 720 ppi).  According to both Schewe and my own tests letting Lr handle the up / down interpolation  rather than some program in the printing pipeline do it  yields visibly superior results.

96 to 360 ppi  is a pretty big jump but if, as Bart, Tony and Josh point out,  with you use good processing tools and intelligently applied technique you may be pleasantly pleased.

 
« Last Edit: March 29, 2012, 08:20:44 am by Ellis Vener »
Logged

Tony Jay

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2965
Re: 5d mk 3 - enlargement question
« Reply #13 on: March 29, 2012, 01:23:03 am »

Yes indeed.

Not every image will look good with that degree of upsampling but many would.

Regards

Tony Jay
Logged

mstevensphoto

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 448
    • Denver Commercial Photographer
Re: 5d mk 3 - enlargement question
« Reply #14 on: March 29, 2012, 08:01:03 pm »

I wouldn't print much of anything at 96ppi unless I knew my viewer would be far far away.

to try to get back to my initial question let me rephrase a little. suppose I take the same image with my 5dMKII and a new 5dmkIII - let's call it at 400iso and enlarge both of them in photoshop to be 40x60x300dpi - am I likely to see a difference standing 3-4 feet from the printed piece? what about at larger sizes? is the data provided by the MK III really any better for this application? The mega pixels are close enough as to be the same, so I'm trying to figure out if I'll see any benefit strictly as it relates to getting better (less grain, less pixelation) results in my enlargements by switching to the new platform.
Mark
Logged

Tony Jay

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2965
Re: 5d mk 3 - enlargement question
« Reply #15 on: March 29, 2012, 08:30:20 pm »

The answer is still much the same:

It really depends on the image.
Some will handle that sort of upsampling to give a really high quality result and some won't.
Remember that the upsampling will result in an apparently higher resolution print than the native resolution would suggest.

At the end of the day you will need to do some experimentation yourself with different sorts of images and evaluate the result yourself.
I am continually suprised by how robust these image files are to the upsampling.

Regards

Tony Jay
Logged

KenS

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 131
    • Spark of Light Photography
Re: 5d mk 3 - enlargement question
« Reply #16 on: March 30, 2012, 12:52:48 am »

... The mega pixels are close enough as to be the same, so I'm trying to figure out if I'll see any benefit strictly as it relates to getting better (less grain, less pixelation) results in my enlargements by switching to the new platform.
Mark


You may want to download the comparison RAW files at your ISOs of interest from the DPreview studio scene:
http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canoneos5dmarkiii/12

Assuming the 5Dii and 5diii were shot with the same lens and both focused accurately a printed comparsion should help you decide.  My guess is there will be no visible difference in the prints, and even if there is some, just a bit more aggressive output sharpening will probably be more important than any differences you observe.  I will be trying this test myself soon, waiting to be sure the RAW converter for the 5Diii in ACR is finalized.

BTW, I'm a Canon user but you could also download and compare the Nikon D800 RAW file to the Canon files (unfortunately this introduces another variable, different lenses).

If you make any comparsion prints please let us know your results.

mstevensphoto

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 448
    • Denver Commercial Photographer
Re: 5d mk 3 - enlargement question
« Reply #17 on: March 30, 2012, 02:47:46 am »

Hi Ken,
   My local lab has several Nikon d800 prints, I think they're 36x72" - they look stunning. less noise, no visible pixelation. I'm a canon shooter and quite jealous of the sheer size of those prints with no visible problems of any kind. my 72" prints look quite nice from the 5dII but I really do see more artifacts creeping in than I'd like. Advertising clients in particular are always asking for bigger and bigger images whether they actually need it or not.
Mark
Logged

Adam L

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 220
    • http://adamlozo.com
Re: 5d mk 3 - enlargement question
« Reply #18 on: April 12, 2012, 02:30:05 pm »

In the article I posted a link to in my last post Schewe suggests that, when printing from Lightroom 3 (presumably in Lr4 as well), any image  that at a given print size has a native resolution of lower than 360ppi should be up-rezzed in Lr3 's print module to 360ppi for Epson printers and 300 for Canon and similar printers. Conversely if the native resolution is above 360 at a given output size, for prints made on an Epson, uprez to 720 ppi).  According to both Schewe and my own tests letting Lr handle the up / down interpolation  rather than some program in the printing pipeline do it  yields visibly superior results.
 

My recollection in LR4 tuturial was to uprez by a factor of 1.5 and round to the nearest 'generic' native printer setting.   If I have a 200 ppi image for the print size, I would uprez to 300ppi on an Epson printer dispite it having a native 360ppi.    Did I misunderstand the tuturial message?  
« Last Edit: April 12, 2012, 02:48:55 pm by Adam L »
Logged
"That's a lot of money to move a few pix

Schewe

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6229
    • http:www.schewephoto.com
Re: 5d mk 3 - enlargement question
« Reply #19 on: April 12, 2012, 04:14:20 pm »

Did I misunderstand the tuturial message?  

Yes...in Camera to Print & Screen and again in LR4, I recommend taking ANY image below 360/300 (Epson/Canon, HP) up to 360 PPI in Lightroom and applying the correct output sharpening. If the native rez is above 360/300 but below 720/600, upsample to 720/600 in LR.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up