what's your biggest print with a M9 and MM?

[bruniroquai]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm thinking work with digital for a while and make a project here in my little town, of two pictures for each people, character of here. Well, I have no access to a darkroom and good labs around here so I'm thinking to use digital for the whole project.

 

A head portrait and a enviroment portrait would be the pictures for each person.

 

How big Could You print with digital? What is the quality in terms of tones, deep of color and greys and sharpness? compare to analog?

 

What print would you recommend and which papers?

 

I already have an Eizo CG246W , great quality one.

 

Thanks!

[pfhrased]

A friend of mine blew up one of my landscape shots to A0, printed on canvas. It was impressive how much detail was visible. That's with an M9.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[jdlaing]

24" x 36"

[earleygallery]

You should be able to print to whatever size you want.

[davidbaddley]

I've been printing 24"x 36" (M9). The prints are very sharp, much sharper than what I was getting from 35mm film printed that size. I'm happily using the Epson 7880.

[250swb]

The traditional approach to large prints is to stand further away so you can see the picture, so as James says, you can print them any size you like, just stand further and further away to view them as they get bigger. As such the photograph always retains the same resolution.

 

Intellectually you have to ask yourself if all your subjects would take on board the idea of their every wart and wrinkle shown up and highlighted in a gigantic print. Are you doing it for them, or doing it for you, or just doing because you can? On the other hand many photographers find a small print is more intimate and personal, both for the subject and the viewer. It has the feeling of care and thought, it is something to get close to and contemplate in a one-to-one experience, the opposite of a large print where people can walk between the viewer and the picture, breaking the sense intimacy and contemplation.

 

Printing big is about more than printing big.

 

Steve

[pgk]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've had 35mm Velvia transparencies printed to 2x3 m. Its all about viewing distance. If you are talking about a print which can be examined in detail from up close, then I'd suggest 'native resolution' printed at ~150 ppi would be a good starting point but this cannot be set in stone because it depends on the subject and the detail which it contains......

[Jean-Michel]

I've been printing 24"x 36" (M9). The prints are very sharp, much sharper than what I was getting from 35mm film printed that size. I'm happily using the Epson 7880.

 

Same here, but on a 7890, and 20 x 30 with 2" margins. I also print similar size images from a Canon 5d2. As mentioned by others, you can print to whatever size depending on the use and viewing distance. You need to put in the same, or greater,effort in learning how to print digitally as you would have needed to do in darkroom days. Pressing 'print' just does not do much for quality. One good source of information, among many others, is the Camera to Print tutorial available from the Luminous-landscape site.

Jean-Michel

[geoffreyg]

It depends on the standards one is applying. If one uses "4x5 negs" as the printing standard, the look is one where lines are crisp, truly crisp from up close, say 12-18", then perhas 16x20 or 20x24 is the size.

 

Take this with some salt - it is a very harsh criteria, more akin to MFDB and LF than 35mm. A 16x20 print from a 35 mm neg wouldn't suffice at all. If one steps back 3-4', then its a different matter entirely.

[erl]

It's taken most of my life to realize, "if I like it, it's right!".

 

Nobody else is compelled to look.

 

As long as you are only pleasing someone else, you will be discontent.

 

Years ago, I made a B/W print from a film negative. It measured 15 feet on the long edge. I processed it myself. The client was very happy. All I could see was my need for a larger format negative. Since then I have been constantly learning to please myself. Fortunately I can now get away with it.

 

I went all the way up to 4"x5" and then back down again. What I learned was that technique can be more important that gear. I would now happily print big from 35mm, film or digital. I know the gear can handle it.

[jaapv]

I'm thinking work with digital for a while and make a project here in my little town, of two pictures for each people, character of here. Well, I have no access to a darkroom and good labs around here so I'm thinking to use digital for the whole project.

 

A head portrait and a enviroment portrait would be the pictures for each person.

 

How big Could You print with digital? What is the quality in terms of tones, deep of color and greys and sharpness? compare to analog?

 

What print would you recommend and which papers?

 

I already have an Eizo CG246W , great quality one.

 

Thanks!

If you have no experience in printing large and as really large format printers are far too expensive for casual use - a 44” printer will set you back about 6000 $ and reserve another 1000 for papers and ink- I would consider ordering really large prints from a good online printing service like Whitewall or one of the specialized large format printing services . They can mount them professionally as well.

 

I print up to A3+ myself and consider the results as least as good as medium format film.

But it is a learning curve to get there. Your first prints will not be as good as later ones by quite a margin.

 

 

And do read the post on size and resampling here:

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/digital-post-processing-forum/115989-digital-printing-pixels-resolution-resampling.html

Edited December 25, 2013 by jaapv

[bruniroquai]

Thanks everyone the largest A2 or A1, in the future I will add a MFD to my equipment. So a 4880 could be good don't you think? I have many complex using digital, feel that is worse or less good and artistic than film, but I want to give an opportunity to this medium and enjoy the convenience, speed and clean method over film. Just want to see deep and great quality with the final print.

 

Enviado desde mi HTC One mediante Tapatalk

[Jeff S]

Just want to see deep and great quality with the final print.

 

Print quality requires a disciplined workflow (from camera to screen to print), and a good understanding of materials (papers and inks) and techniques, whether prints are large or small. It will take time and learning, no different than the darkroom (a great enlarger will not make great prints...you will). Differences, too, between b/w and color, as expected.

 

The 4880 has been replaced by the 4900. Beware, however, of some clogging issues with the 4900. The 3880 has a much smaller footprint, but still 17" capability. There is no roll feed, though, and the ink set/ color gamut is not quite as broad as the 4900....but still a great machine, capable of producing beautiful prints. I hang silver prints next to inkjet prints without problem...technology and materials have come a long way.

 

Jeff

[E_42]

How big do you want it printed?

 

The picture you can see is 80 x 120 cm is quite sharp. I have rendered it up to the size with 300 dpi before I had it exposed (it´is not printed but exposed @ toto Leutner, Vienna). The grain you see was produced in photoshop/silverefex ....

 

before I have printed it in the proper sizeI made small A4 prints with some sharp excerpts to see if it is still fine. The picture was made with an MM, that I think is quite sharper compered to an M9, but should work as well ...

 

print them big!!

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[sblutter]

With M9 and a good print tech, pretty big:

Steven Blutter Photography

[bruniroquai]

Print quality requires a disciplined workflow (from camera to screen to print), and a good understanding of materials (papers and inks) and techniques, whether prints are large or small. It will take time and learning, no different than the darkroom (a great enlarger will not make great prints...you will). Differences, too, between b/w and color, as expected.

 

The 4880 has been replaced by the 4900. Beware, however, of some clogging issues with the 4900. The 3880 has a much smaller footprint, but still 17" capability. There is no roll feed, though, and the ink set/ color gamut is not quite as broad as the 4900....but still a great machine, capable of producing beautiful prints. I hang silver prints next to inkjet prints without problem...technology and materials have come a long way.

 

Jeff

 

 

You're completely right Jeff, skill, skill and more skill. So 3880 is the right choice? How good are the epson inks for black and white?

 

 

E_42.. wooooooow, I'm amazed , what a print, great quality, and tones, and processing, what inks, papers and printer did You use?

 

Steven, congrats, stunning site

[E_42]

HI Bruno,

 

It is not printed; it is exposed with an OCE Lightjet 500XL on Kodak photo paper (as far as I know). they can print up to 180 x 300 cm long (or even longer) ..!

 

 

cheers

Edited December 26, 2013 by jaapv

[Jeff S]

So 3880 is the right choice? How good are the epson inks for black and white?

 

I can't say what's 'right' for you. I can say that the 3880 is a wonderful machine, fully capable of fine prints, including b/w. There are 3rd party inks, e.g., Piezography (b/w) by Jon Cone (also has color), but I recommend sticking to the standard Epson inks to start. When choosing a printer, consider feed options, cartridge size, etc...not just print size.

 

There are some terrific papers available today, with a variety of tones and textures. I currently enjoy Canson Infinity Baryta Photographique and Platine...among others. Software editing tools like Lightroom can also provide myriad options to change the look and tonality of the pic, much more flexibly and easily than one could ever achieve in the darkroom. As I say, it's a total workflow; the printer is just one part of the chain.

 

Not that it should matter to you, but I generally prefer smaller, more intimate, prints. Too much emphasis today on size IMO...give me a gorgeous print that I can see up close, without my eye wandering wildly all over the place to capture the totality. Different strokes.

 

Jeff

[bruniroquai]

Ok Jeff, I will buy a good 3880, canson baryta or similar and spent a lot of time learning

 

thanks.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[billo101]

A3+