Print viewing distance

[wmchauncey]

I am quite anal about subject sharpness in my images and am not above PP'ing them at 200-400% to satisfy that personality quirk.
My goal is to allow nose-length viewing distance on my prints.  Yes, I get a lot of grief because of this habit but consider this...
when you visit an Art Show, do you not evaluate that photograph at a distance, and then...put your nose up close.  I do!

IMHO, the old-school, proper viewing distance scenario, was left over from paintings that looked hideous up close.
Am I the only one that holds this opinion?     

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... when you visit an Art Show, do you not evaluate that photograph at a distance, and then...put your nose up close.  I do!...

You, I, and all the photographers of the word... but not general public.

If the general public gets its nose close to the print, it is to see what the detail is, not how much of it is there or how sharp it is.

[chez]

You, I, and all the photographers of the word... but not general public.

If the general public gets its nose close to the print, it is to see what the detail is, not how much of it is there or how sharp it is.

But if the detail is just a bunch of blur...would they not be disappointed. Would you love to see fine sharp detail when looking for such detail up close, or be disappointed by something fuzzy.

[BobShaw]

You, I, and all the photographers of the word... but not general public.

If you are interested in the people that buy, then they do. Same with painted art, they want to see the brush strokes. They want to see the detail because that is what they are paying for, or the memory of the spot they once visited. At least that's my experience. $ per pixel.

[Clearair]

Err not really.
I recently printed a 24 by 40 inches colour canvas of a character portrait.
The Baker was resting in his work place in the Souk/Media/Marrakech.
Camera shy, no light, take that moment.
I like the image very much and yes did seek permission before taking ANY photos, it would be the hight of rudeness not too.
There is no way this is sharp. I was not sure about printing it. Glad I did. 
I believe there is a viewing distance to a print when hung for the purpose. To me they snap almost in and out of focus in the environment they are displayed in. Some galleries are better at this than others.
Heres another one to tear apart. Blown highlights. If the printer does not print White, the paper colour is the blown highlight. Not unpleasant for some images and very workable.
I appreciate sharp prints, but textured papers and subject matter means much more in my humble opinion.
Regards

[PeterAit]

For all too many prints, the viewing distance should be about 8 miles.

[wmchauncey]

Touche mon ami...and I thought that Johnnie Carson passed away.       

[PeterAit]

Touche mon ami...and I thought that Johnnie Carson passed away.       

My bon mot was not directed at anyone in particular, I should make clear, and applies to me just as much as anyone else. OK, for me, 10 miles!

[Misirlou]

I went to an Ansel Adams exhibit in Kawasaki City one time in the mid '90s. My mother and I were 66% of the patrons that morning, which was a pretty unusual situation for a Japanese museum.

Anyway, we had plenty of time, so I walked right up to a lot of the prints and looked at them from almost nose length. An elderly museum staff member came up and asked me and asked if I was a photographer.

He actually encouraged me to keep doing that. Wanted to make sure I got to absorb every possible detail, as he had done.

Come to think of it, I went to a Picasso exhibit somewhere else in Tokyo right around the same time. There were no barriers or ropes to keep one away from the displays, so lots of folks were getting very close. No touching of course.

[chez]

Err not really.
I recently printed a 24 by 40 inches colour canvas of a character portrait.
The Baker was resting in his work place in the Souk/Media/Marrakech.
Camera shy, no light, take that moment.
I like the image very much and yes did seek permission before taking ANY photos, it would be the hight of rudeness not too.
There is no way this is sharp. I was not sure about printing it. Glad I did. 
I believe there is a viewing distance to a print when hung for the purpose. To me they snap almost in and out of focus in the environment they are displayed in. Some galleries are better at this than others.
Heres another one to tear apart. Blown highlights. If the printer does not print White, the paper colour is the blown highlight. Not unpleasant for some images and very workable.
I appreciate sharp prints, but textured papers and subject matter means much more in my humble opinion.
Regards

Of course subject matter and the type of paper used for printing are key to making a great photo....but given the choice I'd rather have a sharp detailed image than a fuzzy one any day.

[PeterAit]

I have half seriously considered displaying prints that were hooked up to van de Graff generator so the pixel peepers would get a surprise!

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

If someone failed to see a point in your photo at normal viewing distance and has to come nose-close in search for it...

[chez]

Those that think coming up close to a large print are pixel peepers just don't understand how much detail can be revealed in a large print that is made properly. I've walked up close to a Manglesen print one time to notice a great elk in the corner which you would never have seen from far away. Yes, the print looked fantastic from "proper viewing distance"...whatever that is, but if you did not examine the fine details in the image from coming up close, you would miss out a different perspective of the print.

If you are happy about putting up this arbritary fence around your prints to keep people at the Proper Viewing Distance so they could not examine the fine details...that's your choice, but I know people love the details available in large prints and I for one would be disappointed if I came in close just to see fuzzy details.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

What's the largest you printed your photos, Chez?

[chez]

What's the largest you printed your photos, Chez?

Largest print I've printed and displayed was 6' x 4'. Most of my prints are in the 3'x4' range.

Majority of my prints are landscapes, but I also have some street scenes.

[Jonathan Wienke]

For all too many prints, the viewing distance should be about 8 miles.

Where's the "like" button when you need it?