gareth_c Posted July 24, 2007 Share #21 Posted July 24, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Piers, I bought Genuine Fractals about two weeks before my last big Windoze computer died and I replaced it with a PowerMac, on which of course, that version of GF did not work. They wanted me to pay the full amount again which I baulked at. Off-topic I know but...this whole thing of companies now not allowing cross-platform upgrades is beyond a joke. You might finf though that if you really push them they might relent. I had to do that for CS2 and a few other software packages that would have cost over £6000 in total to buy again. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 24, 2007 Posted July 24, 2007 Hi gareth_c, Take a look here How big can you print an M8 file. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
mhleo Posted July 24, 2007 Share #22 Posted July 24, 2007 Hello, I also printed out several DNG files at 1m wide, with no major issues, nor even resizing with an external plug-in. Here is the link, if you wish to look: Digigraphie best, mhleo Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted July 24, 2007 Share #23 Posted July 24, 2007 Hi Wilson, just in case you're interested the Alien Skin Blow-up software is an unlimited 30 day trial. No watermarks, no restrictions at all. It is expensive however - roughly in the same ball park as Genuine Fractals. If you order the CD rather than the download you get both Mac and PC version. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted July 24, 2007 Author Share #24 Posted July 24, 2007 Hi Wilson, just in case you're interested the Alien Skin Blow-up software is an unlimited 30 day trial. No watermarks, no restrictions at all. It is expensive however - roughly in the same ball park as Genuine Fractals. If you order the CD rather than the download you get both Mac and PC version. Steve, The family is now a PC free zone at last, so Mac only is good enough. I am tempted by a program called Size Fixer XL (sounds like one of those Spam emails we all get), which gets rave reviews apart from being rather slow. The comparative shots showed it was better than GF or ASBU. I am just about to go off to the Photo Studio and they may well have software there, which would come free with the print, which will be anything but free, Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted July 24, 2007 Share #25 Posted July 24, 2007 The question is not How big? but How large a viewing angle? The largest angle that we can comfortably keep together and see as a complete image, not as one detail after another, is about that subtended by an A4 or a 18x24cm or 8x10" print at normal reading distance, which is 25–30 cm or 10–12". If a print or any other picture is larger than that, we spontaneously try to increase the viewing distance so as to decrease the viewing angle to one we can handle. This increased distance does of course decrease the needed resolution and acutance in proportion. So there is a simple conclusion: If you can do a visually sharp A4 or equivalent, you can do anything! There exist madmen who go at a picture with magnifiers and microscopes, but they are not interested in images – they are interested solely in grain, noise and pixels. Forget them. They are the lunatic fringe. The old man from the Age of Edward & Ansel Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted July 24, 2007 Share #26 Posted July 24, 2007 I agree about the viewing angle Lars, but sometimes there are photographs - or paintings for that matter - where you _don't_ want to take everything in at once, you want your eyes to flit around pickiing up details as they do so, and for those you need a large print. Agree about the grain peepers though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
vic vic Posted July 24, 2007 Share #27 Posted July 24, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) oh......... oh oh............ wow wow............ how BIG YOU can print from the M8....... u can print BIG.......... VERY BIG ...... VERY VERY BIG............. . . . HUGE ............... VERY BIG U HAVE BIG............. VERY BIG prints with the M8........... ah and forgot .............. U can MAKE MANY MANY....... ALOT of clicks with the M8 ........ MANY many TIMES u can click on the M8......... and ALL of them BIG........BIG.............. .. . U ganna have BIG prints.............. . . and all the art critic WOMEN will be impressed how BIG your prints are....... ) ooooooooops...... maybe u mean "big" as "memorable" prints ?? hahha ....... BIG hahhahahah Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted July 24, 2007 Share #28 Posted July 24, 2007 Victor, you're beginning to make yourself look like a fool. Wilson asked a question and people answered it. The same question could have been asked by a photographer using film and would have been just as valid. Why Wilson wants a large print is entirely his own affair. Try to get over the fact that some people use digital rather than film, and a little less sarcasm would also be useful too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
vic vic Posted July 24, 2007 Share #29 Posted July 24, 2007 steve...... do i look like "fool" , do i sound like "fool" ......... do i make imression of "fool".............. no steve....... i just point out the origins of "BIG" talks.......... that is it....... it is the same "mental source"............ BIG............. read carefully and be open minded to what i WRITE WRITE WRITE.......... before concluding that it is ME who looks "fool" and not the "BIG BIG crap photos and nonesense talks".................. about wilsons question......... M8 makes big enough pictures if the pictures really worth enlragement....... it is really good enough...... dont worry about M8's BIG picture printing abilities ............ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted July 24, 2007 Share #30 Posted July 24, 2007 Victor, Wilson is asking for some technical advice, not an essay on aesthetics. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted July 24, 2007 Author Share #31 Posted July 24, 2007 steve...... do i look like "fool" , do i sound like "fool" ......... do i make imression of "fool".............. no steve....... i just point out the origins of "BIG" talks.......... that is it....... it is the same "mental source"............ BIG............. read carefully and be open minded to what i WRITE WRITE WRITE.......... before concluding that it is ME who looks "fool" and not the "BIG BIG crap photos and nonesense talks".................. about wilsons question......... M8 makes big enough pictures if the pictures really worth enlragement....... it is really good enough...... dont worry about M8's BIG picture printing abilities ............ Victor, I don't understand the point you are trying to make and to be blunt, I doubt very much if anyone else does either. I have an image I personally like. I have an area in my house, where anything smaller than a 24" x 36" picture would look lost. Before I went to the considerable expense of getting an M8 picture printed to that size, I was asking the many knowledgeable people on this forum, whether the M8 image would stand up or would the pixelation or lack of detail make the image unpleasant to look at from a reasonable viewing distance. I have received a lot of useful information and it seems that it is a reasonable proposition. I will therefore get the print done tomorrow in a professional photographer's workshop, who commonly print such size pictures, usually from a Canon 1DSMk11. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnwolf Posted July 24, 2007 Share #32 Posted July 24, 2007 Wilson, Your question is perfectly reasonable. No need to defend or explain yourself. Let us know how the print turns out. John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted July 24, 2007 Share #33 Posted July 24, 2007 Victor, I don't understand the point you are trying to make and to be blunt, I doubt very much if anyone else does either. I'd agree with that, I have no idea what the response above means, or why its so aggressive (certainly that's the way it comes across). Been following this thread as it applies to all digital images - I'm still confused by upscaling and interpolation etc., but can make perfectly acceptable A3's from D1 images and Epson 4870 scans! Victor, as the saying goes, if you've got nothing worthwhile to say........ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jlondon53 Posted July 25, 2007 Share #34 Posted July 25, 2007 Am I expecting too much trying to print to 24" x 36"? Wilson I wouldn't hesitate to enlarge this file to that size for one second. This is an awesome capture by the way. I could be wrong, but to me it has the look/rendering/fingerprint of an older M lens. Would you mind satisfying my curiostity and sharing what lens was used? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted July 25, 2007 Author Share #35 Posted July 25, 2007 I wouldn't hesitate to enlarge this file to that size for one second. This is an awesome capture by the way. I could be wrong, but to me it has the look/rendering/fingerprint of an older M lens. Would you mind satisfying my curiostity and sharing what lens was used? John, I would agree about the look and it surprised me too, given that it was taken with my contrastmeister - the Zeiss Biogon 35 f2. I think it must have been to do with the lighting and the angle of the sun. Thanks for the kind comments. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonoslack Posted July 25, 2007 Share #36 Posted July 25, 2007 I did a wedding last weekend, and took a group shot of 150 people from the attic - they weren't in 3/2 configuration, so I cropped out the middle section and printed it up to 120X43cm (there was a little cropping from the edge as well). (I suppose that full frame would have been about 150/100 cm (thats 60"x40"). I delivered it to the next morning lunch party, and I have a photo of a little girl standing 6" from it examining herself - I think she was examining her dress rather than the grain, but nobody else complained about the shot. I print A2+ size all the time (and sell them) - usually printing directly out of Aperture, otherwise using bicubic sampling in photoshop (like you, I've seen the comparisons with Genuine Fractals etc, and it doesn't seem worth the candle). Bottom line is that 24X36 is going to be splendid as long as you aren't planning on looking at it through a loupe! (and even then I think you'll be pleased) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.