"Elson T. Elizaga" <elson@xxxxxx> writes: > I'm getting more inquiries from clients who want to have large > pictures of their products, around 30x50 inches, even more. One of > them want the pictures in backlit material. Now my questions: > > Is it possible for a digital SLR to produce such large photos -- clear > and sharp? What is the maximum enlargement? The biggest I've gone from my 6 megapixel Fuji S2 was 16x24 inches. And that's for just one image. That one image looks very good to me; better than 16x20 images from 35mm film have looked the relatively few times in my life I've gone that big from 35mm. But that was years ago and films have improved. So I can't confidently tell you that you can go to 30x50. My guess is that you *can't* go to 30x50 from 6 megapixels and look good at all close up. (You can, of course, make a billboard from a 110 negative that looks great...so long as you only view it from normal billboard distances.) 3000 pixels along a 50 inch edge is only 60 pixels per inch. > What about using a 35mm negative or transparency for such large > prints? Is current printing technology capable of doing such, or > should I use, instead, a medium format 6x7? The real issue is *film* technology. I *have* seen pictures that big done from 35mm that looked *great* -- but it was B&W, XP2. > I've heard rumors that a 35mm negative frame can be scanned in a > special, high-end scanner, resulting in super large images that are > not grainy, but look like those made by medium or large format > cameras. Is this possible? Is this the reason why many photographers > are selling their 6x7s? I'm pretty sure that comes under the "no free lunch" rule, sorry! I think the movement is to digital, and it's partly because very *few* people want such big prints, and the workflow advantages are tremendous for smaller prints. Certainly a better scan will get you a better print. But a better scan will also image the grain more precisely; it won't magically make it depart. Now, I don't know if perhaps some labs have gotten expert with using some of the software that electronically reduces grain. That might work, haven't pushed it for big prints from fine-grain film (I played with it for very-high-speed film, a whole different problem really). I wouldn't rule out the Kodak 14 megapixel camera for that size, without consulting people who've tried it. -- David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:dd-b@xxxxxxxx>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/> RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/> <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/> Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/> <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/> Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/>
