The MP race and print sizes ?

[grahamc]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello

I’m a M10 owner and considering a higher MP camera, with a view to printing more of my work.  

I’m curious to know whether there’s a commonly accepted rule of thumb in terms of max (high quality) print size for a given MP sensor ? Or to be more specific, what size would we confidently look at printing from say M10-R (circa 40MP sensor) or M11 (circa 60MP sensor) files ? 

Although, as a related question, do these questions to some extent become null and void these days with the up-sizing software technology available today ? 

The largest print by far I have in my home from another photographer not myself is 1.5m x 1m  so I don’t ever imagine needing to print larger than that.    I doubt that particular print was shot on a super high MP camera.

So, considering large prints have been around much longer than high MP cameras I’m really just wondering if we really must enter today’s  “MP race” to achieve similar print sizes?  
 

And apologies if this question is quite basic but I know almost nothing about print and equivalent sizes right now. Hence asking  

Edited August 6, 2023 by grahamc

[frame-it]

 

 

 

 

[grahamc]

14 minutes ago, frame-it said:

 

 

 

 

Great, Thankyou 

[irenedp]

1 hour ago, grahamc said:

Hello

I’m a M10 owner and considering a higher MP camera, with a view to printing more of my work.  

I’m curious to know whether there’s a commonly accepted rule of thumb in terms of max (high quality) print size for a given MP sensor ? Or to be more specific, what size would we confidently look at printing from say M10-R (circa 40MP sensor) or M11 (circa 60MP sensor) files ? 

Although, as a related question, do these questions to some extent become null and void these days with the up-sizing software technology available today ? 

The largest print by far I have in my home from another photographer not myself is 1.5m x 1m  so I don’t ever imagine needing to print larger than that.    I doubt that particular print was shot on a super high MP camera.

So, considering large prints have been around much longer than high MP cameras I’m really just wondering if we really must enter today’s  “MP race” to achieve similar print sizes?  
 

And apologies if this question is quite basic but I know almost nothing about print and equivalent sizes right now. Hence asking  

Just be aware that at times the current resizing software is wanting (both Topaz and definitely Lightroom super-resolution). You need to be very careful and look at your image 1:1 to make sure that there are no artifacts. They do happen.

Said that, larger images -for instance, in a gallery- are viewed from a certain distance and that allows relatively low mp files to be printed in large sizes. An M10r standard file will give you 74 cm height at 182 pixels per inch (the theoretical minimum threshold, although there is a lot of discussion about this and you can get away with lower resolutions). An S3 file (which has sixty something MP, equivalent to an M11) prints 90 cm tall at the same resolution. That gives you a couple reference points. 

Unless a camera is stabilised, higher MP resolutions translate also into more camera shake, but that is easily solvable by shooting at higher shutter speeds. Sadly, one forgets from time to time, so you may miss more shots with a 10r or an 11 than with your current 10.

[jankap]

1 hour ago, grahamc said:

So, considering large prints have been around much longer than high MP cameras I’m really just wondering if we really must enter today’s  “MP race” to achieve similar print sizes?  

We don't need to enter, but Leica has to follow other manufactures. "We" think, that "we" should have gear with bigger numbers, because bigger is better.

[Hans-Dieter Gülicher]

I prefer my M 10-R comibned with the new APO-Summicron 35 mm (inspite of my S3 = 64 mp), ISO 200 primarily. My desktop is a MS Surface studio II, monitor size 4500 x 3000 px. I like to produce 4K HDAV-shows and on the other hand to print my pictures up to A3+ size (Epson SC P600). In any case the base are dng-files, developted with Adobe ACR / - Photoshop. In case of printing the layout, text etc. is done with Adobe inDesing, even starting the printing process. The Workflow is Adobe-rgb 14/16 bit.

Facit: If my shoots are o.k. my further "products" are of highest quality.

p.s. I use my big machine S3 in especial cases, only.

[pegelli]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Another view on how many pixels you need to print "big"

Like irenedp said it's not only print size that matters, but only in combination with the viewing distance.

[Jeff S]

One can print a billboard from an iPhone.  Just make sure the print is sufficiently far from the road.  

My “upgrades” over the years from the M8.2 to the M10-R/Monochrom have not resulted in bigger prints.  I enjoy the same small to moderate sized prints that I made even back in film days. The advantages of modern gear for me have little to do with MP, which is more about marketing than practicality for my photography.  There have been, however, improvements in sensor technology, camera and editing software, etc that have indeed yielded meaningful benefits for my printmaking.

Jeff

Edited August 6, 2023 by Jeff S

[Kwesi]

10 hours ago, grahamc said:

Hello

I’m a M10 owner and considering a higher MP camera, with a view to printing more of my work.  

I’m curious to know whether there’s a commonly accepted rule of thumb in terms of max (high quality) print size for a given MP sensor ? Or to be more specific, what size would we confidently look at printing from say M10-R (circa 40MP sensor) or M11 (circa 60MP sensor) files ? 

Although, as a related question, do these questions to some extent become null and void these days with the up-sizing software technology available today ? 

The largest print by far I have in my home from another photographer not myself is 1.5m x 1m  so I don’t ever imagine needing to print larger than that.    I doubt that particular print was shot on a super high MP camera.

So, considering large prints have been around much longer than high MP cameras I’m really just wondering if we really must enter today’s  “MP race” to achieve similar print sizes?  
 

And apologies if this question is quite basic but I know almost nothing about print and equivalent sizes right now. Hence asking  

Hi Graham,

I’m afraid you may be putting the cart before the horse. I would suggest starting with the requirements of the printer that you intend to use. Most fine art printers and print shops require -prefer- 300dpi at actual size. So for a standard M10 that is 20 inches wide. 6000/300. Of course there is wiggle room. 

[Smudgerer]

12 hours ago, grahamc said:

Hello

I’m a M10 owner and considering a higher MP camera, with a view to printing more of my work.  

I’m curious to know whether there’s a commonly accepted rule of thumb in terms of max (high quality) print size for a given MP sensor ? Or to be more specific, what size would we confidently look at printing from say M10-R (circa 40MP sensor) or M11 (circa 60MP sensor) files ? 

Although, as a related question, do these questions to some extent become null and void these days with the up-sizing software technology available today ? 

The largest print by far I have in my home from another photographer not myself is 1.5m x 1m  so I don’t ever imagine needing to print larger than that.    I doubt that particular print was shot on a super high MP camera.

So, considering large prints have been around much longer than high MP cameras I’m really just wondering if we really must enter today’s  “MP race” to achieve similar print sizes?  
 

And apologies if this question is quite basic but I know almost nothing about print and equivalent sizes right now. Hence asking  

Hello Graham, this year I added an Epson SC-P6000 to the other two Epson A2 size printers that I have, ( a SC-P800 for up to A2 prints plus an old but still good 3800 Pro that I use exclusively with the Cone Piezography Pro ink-set for B&W prints ). Now being able to print up to 61cm/24" wide with the SC-P6000 has meant that I have revisited and reprinted quite a few images that were made with my M9's and M10-P/D cameras and I see little or no advantage when printing to that size from the 18-24mp M's than the prints made from images shot with my M10-R and M10-M..........Of course, everything does depend on the image itself, you can make a perfect large print from a 12mp camera and a bad one from a 60mp camera. My printing shows that there's no real world difference between the two Leica M sensor sizes that I own/use. Viewing distance too comes into play, you tend to stand back further from a larger print, so there is that too. Your 24mp M10's will be excellent to A3+, A2 and even to A1 in my experience.

Good to know you are considering taking the printing step, I do believe that if you don't print your images you are not completing the circle..........Good luck!

[Jon Warwick]

13 hours ago, grahamc said:

Hello

I’m a M10 owner and considering a higher MP camera, with a view to printing more of my work.  

I’m curious to know whether there’s a commonly accepted rule of thumb in terms of max (high quality) print size for a given MP sensor ? Or to be more specific, what size would we confidently look at printing from say M10-R (circa 40MP sensor) or M11 (circa 60MP sensor) files ? 

My own view is I can reliably get the print quality that I want up to around 40” off the 40mp cameras, so SL2 or M10-R; and reliably up to 50” off my M11. That’s based on 300dpi inkjets on Fine Art Baryta.

For any of the Monochroms, I’d add another 10” on top of those, given the added acuity, resolution, and lack of aberrations of no colour filter array mean the files resample even better. I have tried the M11M, and from what I’ve seen I’d be really surprised if it’s not recording more detail than my GFX100.

[grahamc]

8 hours ago, Steven said:

Are you considering the 10 R or the 11? 
 

ive been printing a2 from mid res film scans and as long at you don’t stand too close from the print, it’s gorgeous. 
 

i do consider a digital camera from times to times, mainly when I’m stuck at x rays checks in airports. So sick of it. 

Yes considering either 10R or 11 and not getting very far with my decision.  

I took my 10D as well as film last trip and surprisingly was quite happy to shoot 90% digital.

[sometimesmaybe]

8 hours ago, Jeff S said:

One can print a billboard from an iPhone.  Just make sure the print is sufficiently far from the road.  

thats the other half of the 'how many MP needed for printing' equation - viewing distance

printing bigger doesn't automatically mean you need more MP. how far is the viewer going to stand from the print?

 

[Jeff S]

I thought that was clear.

Jeff

[Smudgerer]

5 hours ago, grahamc said:

Yes considering either 10R or 11 and not getting very far with my decision.  

I took my 10D as well as film last trip and surprisingly was quite happy to shoot 90% digital.

Why not decide on your printer choices first before you think more about upgrading your cameras to higher mp's?...........Get into the printing process, see what size of print suits your images and then you'd have a better idea as to whether or not you need to upgrade to a higher mp body. I would suspect not. A printer like the Epson SC-P900 series that goes up to A2 size would be a good one to start with. Printing your work is the best way of honing your photographic skills, it beats viewing your work on a computer screen by a long chalk.

[adan]

I would just note that the 300 dpi "standard" is a bit long in the tooth. 

It was created for analog printing-press reproduction with half-tone dot screens running about 150 lines per inch (for high-end magazines). Assumption was we needed 2 pixels per ink-dot as a safety margin to avoid any artifacts (aliasing or jaggies).

It may still have a place with "Lightjet"-type printing (lasers exposing traditional silver-based photographic paper).

But with inkjet printers that spray ink at paper, it is somewhat overkill. The algorithms in the printer-driver software itself may convert the effective resolution to something more like 240 ppi usable resolution, due to dithering to get the widest color range out of just 8 colors of ink.

And I have printed some M8 photographs as large as 20 x 13.6" (50x33cm), which is about 180 ppi - and they just look like, well, photographs.

[dugby]

I have on display,  75cm x 100cm prints (just slightly smaller than A0) taken on my M240/50FLE, and I am well pleased. 

At 2m I can see individual hair strands, no major re-work of the DNG, apart from WB/brightness/contrast.

 

I have not yet printed anywhere near the above size with my M10-R/50APO, so cannot yet comment about how increased MP and a better lens (50APO) will compare.

[grahamc]

Thanks to all those contributing .  Some great advice here and also personal examples of print sizes with different M cameras that are greatly appreciated 

I will indeed have to buy a printer and start experimenting I think 

[DadDadDaddyo]

21 hours ago, Jon Warwick said:

I have tried the M11M, and from what I’ve seen I’d be really surprised if it’s not recording more detail than my GFX100.

This, exactly. 

My experience with the M10M, the M11M, and the GFX100 and GFX100S, parallels this observation. 

This realization was enough to trigger a move in my equipment closet, one so dramatic I'm still a little surprised I actually went and did it. 

I sold my GFX Series gear, body and lenses, realizing that at the sizes at which I print (24 inch paper) the Leicas gave me everything I needed, and then some. 

The result was a significant simplification in my pre-shoot decision making. I usually let lenses be the hinge point in such decisions. Before, I would find myself thinking about the comparison between Leica 35mm and Fujifilm Medium Format lenses of equivalent angle of view to decide which system to apply to a situation. It slowly dawned in me that it was the optical consideration that mattered, and even then, only potentially, rather than the resolution, or even pixel size, as I mulled things over. 

In other words, at the print sizes I was dealing with, the resolution differences fell out of the equation. 

So when it came to optics, I realized the Fujifilm GF lenses, superb as they are, were being measured in my consideration in comparison to the Leica lenses. The behavior of the GF lenses was beyond reproach. In fact, what dawned in me was that for the most part, they had no characteristics! The exception was the sublime 110mm f/2. This is a lens that is poetic in its handling of light, one might even say, "Leica-like".

And that did the trick. Knowing that I could always claw my way back if it turned out to be a foolish decision, I sold off my entire GFX collection. 

And....

I've never looked back. The GFX series was amazing. But in monochrome, I'm finding the M11M meets, easily, the level of detail needed for my prints. And in terms of work flow, I much prefer the native mono DNGs from the M11M to dealing with processing the GFX files to where I want them. 

For "blast you through the wall" resolution, I've still got my Large Format gear. Though truthfully, the M10M and even more now the M11M images I'm getting "feel" more like 4x5 than they do like Medium Format. 

Grab the M11M and a carbon fiber tripod (or even just my cherished Manfrotto monopod), or haul my Richard Ritter 8x10, plus lenses, plus film holders, plus etc., etc., or even my venerable Hasselblad, plus a few backs and a few lenses, and you can see that things have really changed in the prep stage of my image making. 

So why keep those: the Hasselblad system and the Large Format stuff?

Because what they offer is possibly incremental, but it's not redundant.

But I found that in actual use, in monochrome, the M10M and even more so now, the M11M, turned my GFX gear from my most-used system into my least-used system. And I never would have guessed that would happen...

Now as always, Your Mileage May Vary, in fact, it almost certainly will.

I've got nothing but praise for the Fujifilm Digital Medium Format line. But in my use cases, in monochrome, at the print sizes I deal in (say around 24x36-inch-class), the Leicas won the day. Easy to carry. Lenses to love. Gorgeous tonality. An ergonomic comfort level built up over more than 60 years of personal experience with Leica rangefinders.

Yup. This was easy. 

(Yikes! Sorry for length of post. At least I won't feel tempted to say this over and over! Thanks for your partied and indulgence!)

Edited August 7, 2023 by DadDadDaddyo
Woah! Really long post!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[jaapv]

May I suggest the Epson XP 15000?