Herr Barnack Posted February 23, 2015 Share #1 Posted February 23, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hello, everyone - I just finished reading this article written by David Farkas http://www.reddotforum.com/content/2014/11/why-leica-is-staying-at-37-5mp-for-the-s-typ-007/ and a couple of quotes from it started me thinking about print size, specifically the following: ...As for myself, I’ve been shooting with the S2 and then S 006 since before the S2 was even in production. I have made eye-poppingly good 30×40 inch prints myself and have seen beautiful fine art prints 5 x 7 feet printed from single S2 files hanging in our gallery at Leica Store Miami from photographer EJ Camp... It is obvious that the S2 system is capable of producing huge prints that are up to fine art museum image quality standards; that is a given. Being an M240 owner and user, I naturally began to wonder what the M240 fitted with Leica M lenses is capable of in terms of print sizes that would also meet fine art museum image quality standards. I realize that attempting to quantify a concept like "fine art museum image quality standards" may be a little like trying to nail a square of Jell-O to the wall. Nonetheless, I am curious to hear the thoughts of others who shoot with the M240 and print from the files it produces. So my question for M240 users - particularly for those who print from M240 files - is: Where is the size limit for the M240 in terms of producing fine art museum image quality prints? Any insights/observations will be greatly appreciated. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 23, 2015 Posted February 23, 2015 Hi Herr Barnack, Take a look here M240 and print size. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
wparsonsgisnet Posted February 23, 2015 Share #2 Posted February 23, 2015 It would be nice to hear David Farkas' answer to this. As I recall, he was making 30x40 prints from the M8. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
batmobile Posted February 23, 2015 Share #3 Posted February 23, 2015 I think this is impossible to answer. Ever seen Daido Moriyama's large screen prints. They probably contain about 1MP of detail over five feet. Museums store art. I think the required 'quality' entirely depends on the type of 'art'. For regular photographic purposes, I think its probably better to talk in terms of detail retention. IMO a great 24 MP is good for A2 with high frequency detail beautifully rendered and far bigger if fine detail is not that important, or if viewed from a good distance. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thighslapper Posted February 23, 2015 Share #4 Posted February 23, 2015 Fancy commercial printing software (Genuine Fractals etc) will allow you to enlarge way beyond the native resolution of the image with retention of edge sharpness and detail to a great extent. Viewing distances are also greater, so avoidance of pixellation produces a very acceptable image. The definition of 'fine art' has been discussed elsewhere on this forum and usually rouses a snarling minority into vitriolic replies .... countered by a number of gentle aesthetes who come over all arty farty and defend the right of the barely talented to parade rubbish as 'high art' ....... and the rest of us just rather confused in the middle poking both sides with a stick for fun ......... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wparsonsgisnet Posted February 23, 2015 Share #5 Posted February 23, 2015 I, for one, reserve the right to fart when I art. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanJW Posted February 23, 2015 Share #6 Posted February 23, 2015 Some years ago I had an M8 image printed at about 40" x 30" and the detail was superb. I have not tried going that large with either M9 or M(240) but quite obviously if the M8 sensor was good enough for 40 x 30, the M240 sensor should be capable of even larger. I am interested to hear how large from others. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DLS Posted February 23, 2015 Share #7 Posted February 23, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) I don't know about maximum size, but there are rules about size vs. viewing distance that I think are relevant. Understanding these ratios may help determine what will ultimately work or not. Erwin Puts offered this not too long ago: Vanishing knowledge (1) | The TAO of Leica Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Warwick Posted February 23, 2015 Share #8 Posted February 23, 2015 Depends partly on the subject matter. A close up of someone's head will enlarge massively and still look natural without much problem (I've done 60x40 inches off both Lambda and Epsons for peoples' faces) ..... whereas a landscape with very fine and complex detail will often fall apart at much smaller sizes (I might not be happy at bigger than 30x20" for a landscape); whereas for street images, up to 40x27" looks pretty good, if not a bit bigger. At 200dpi off a Lambda, the native resolution off the M240 gets you to a print of about 30x20, so getting to 40x27" isn't a massive upscaling. I'd point out that a tripod does make a huge difference at these sizes ..... Your sensor is only 1.5" wide and that is massive enlargement factor (20-30x) where flawless technique (stability, focusing) pays dividends. I would add that - because its files look very unprocessed due to no colour filter - a Monochrom can often get to larger sizes than an M240 and still look "organic". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill W Posted February 24, 2015 Share #9 Posted February 24, 2015 I printed this M8 photo from 2007 on canvas at 24X48 and the detail is superb I feel. I did not upscale it before I sent it to the lab that did the print I left it up to them if they felt it necessary. 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/241479-m240-and-print-size/?do=findComment&comment=2769755'>More sharing options...
Likaleica Posted February 24, 2015 Share #10 Posted February 24, 2015 Native resolution at 240 dpi is 16.6 x 25 inches. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gjames9142 Posted March 7, 2015 Share #11 Posted March 7, 2015 This is about 10 feet on the longest dimension. From my Monochrom. Don't whether it's museum quality, but it is on the outside wall of a museum right now and looks fine from the right viewing distance. But we are looking at an Iphone shot. 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/241479-m240-and-print-size/?do=findComment&comment=2776652'>More sharing options...
250swb Posted March 8, 2015 Share #12 Posted March 8, 2015 Where is the size limit for the M240 in terms of producing fine art museum image quality prints? There isn't a limit, you can print very small where resolution would be adequate from a 3mp camera, or very big where a 3mp camera produces a very graphic deconstructed image, because 'fine art' is about the concept and idea and the skill in presenting it, not a competition to see who can print biggest for a given resolution. You are perhaps thinking not of museums and centres of art such as the Guggenheim but print stores that can sell images by the square foot to cover any size of wall that needs filling. So with that criteria settled an M240 will produce adequate sized images, perhaps suitable for the bathroom but not for the dining room. That said they should also be unchallenging to the mind, so sunsets are ideal, but they aren't 'art'. Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gjames9142 Posted March 8, 2015 Share #13 Posted March 8, 2015 With the M9, it is possible to make a completely satisfactory print at 24x36. I suspect that the M240 would yield something a little bigger. I have a running discussion with the man who makes my big prints about the amount of sharpening. The temptation is to over-sharpen and this gives the print an unreal, highly processed look. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.