Imaging Enlarging Techniques

[jvora]

Hello :

I did post this one another forum, but did not get manyh replies thus wish to post the same questioin here -

I am seriously considering the D3s - 12MP would be sufficient for the most part, but there could be times when I need to print 30 x 40 inches.
Wondering if Master "Up-rez-ers" and Master "Printers" can share their techniques that go beyond using Adobe's bicubic, bicubic smoother and plug-ins such as Blow Up2, etc.

Wish to learn the special / "dark magic" of enlarging and preparing files for fine art printing.

Undertaking workshops is not an option at present as I am not based in the US - If there are books ( I have checked amazon.com ) that detail techniques and workflows, I will be happy to purchase them.

I await your replies.

Jai

[JohnDavidTressel]

I used Genuine Fractals photoshop plug-in when I was working in the wide format printing industry.

There were some extreme cases where clients provided 15 cm wide pictures that needed to be 2+ meters wide for printouts at 150 dpi on banners.

Luckily the source files were good, that's a key thing when upsizing.

For the stock photography business many photographers need to upres and often use genuine fractals. There's another real known plug-in but the name evades me right now

do more searching around the forum. This has been discusses at length 

[bretedge]

I've tried numerous methods, including Genuine Fractals, but I've gotten the best results using Lightroom to up-rez image files.  It's quite simple, too.  I just made a 32" x 48" print for a client from a Canon 5D MKII and the resulting print was astonishing.  Even small details, such as distant boulders, maintained sharpness.  The only visible artifacting I found was a halo around a high contrast area between the landscape and sky.  This was easily resolved in about 5 minutes with the clone tool.

If you use Lightroom I'd try it for up-rez'ing your image.  I think you'll be pleasantly surprised with the result.

[jbrembat]

Try PhotoResampling.

Jacopo

[francois]

Jeff Schewe wrote an article on that very subject ( http://www.digitalphotopro.com/technique/software-technique/the-art-of-the-up-res.html ). I don't know if that technique is still state of the art but I agree with Brett, Lightroom 3 is all I need.

[Lightsmith]

It depends upon the viewing distance. Billboards are printed at 60-110dpi and most magazines at 140ppi. If the 30x40 is going to be viewed at 24 inches the 300ppi would be a consideration as a minimum resolution. The reality is that the viewing distance increases with the size of the picture and if an inkjet printer is used there is dithering involved which also makes it possible to produce far larger prints.

A number of nature photographers were printing and had no trouble selling 20x30 prints shot with 2 megapixel cameras. They were high end pro level cameras with top notch lenses and not a 2MP point and shoot camera with a plastic 10x zoom.

You can easily test yourself by enlarging a section of a picture and cropping out a 8x10 section and having it printed both with a photo processed print and as an inkjet print and judge for yourself. Photoshop can easily handle a 4x extrapolation to turn a 12MP file into something suitable for making a 30x40 in many cases. Safer to use a D3x but it depends upon the subject and there is always Genuine Fractals for even larger prints.

[Dick Roadnight]

However good or big your camera, someone might want you to print at 180 original camera pixels per print inch or bigger...

...so what is the work flow?

Do you sharpen after uprezing?

...presumably you do what you can on the original raw file, like clarity, contrast, WB, some sharpening?

Does the workflow change if you use a decent RIP like Colorburst?

(180 original camera pixels per print inch would be 44 * 33 ... should look good with an 86H in MS on a 9900?)

[Aristoc]

you didn't mention bicubic sharper in your original post. I found in scott kelby's book he shares the techniquie of another photogpher who made large poster prints by going again what adobe tells you to do. he says using bicubic sharper, which is normally intended for downsizing, will produce large, sharp prints, better than the other two methods which were also tested.

[Schewe]

...the techniquie of another photogpher who made large poster prints by going again what adobe tells you to do. he says using bicubic sharper, which is normally intended for downsizing, will produce large, sharp prints, better than the other two methods which were also tested.

Both Bicubic and Bicubic Sharper have sharpening components built it...the better option is to use Bicubic Smoother and then add sharpening as needed after the upsampling. That way you can control the sharpening and avoid artifacts...with the Bicubic Sharper approach you have no control.

I suppose it would work for somebody who is lazy or doesn't understand how to sharpen after an upsample...and yes, I've tested pretty much everything about upsampling and sharpening and generally fall on the side of using Lightroom to upsample and output sharpen for times when more resolution for a print is needed...

[sm906]

If you use Lightroom I'd try it for up-rez'ing your image.  I think you'll be pleasantly surprised with the result.

Sounds great. I tried upsampling with LR as well. My results were disappoiniting (compared to Photoshops bicubic algorithm). But, maybe I did something wrong. What I did in LR was simple upsizing the export size (pixel count was higher than the native resolution of the camera RAW file) for the TIFF.

Can you tell me (us) how you managed to get good results in LR? What did you do to get there?

Thomas

[deanwork]

1. Blow Up

2. Q-Image