Very High res images required to test new printer.
Discussion
I have a new machine that can print up to 1.5m wide x 50m long on most materials including banners etc up to 1440dpi in full colour. Fully UV stable for outdoor use.
I want to run some high quality test prints but cannot find any very high resolution / high quality images.
Can anyone help? If so I would be willing to do some printing work for you!
Cheers.
I want to run some high quality test prints but cannot find any very high resolution / high quality images.
Can anyone help? If so I would be willing to do some printing work for you!
Cheers.
1.5m / 25.4mm x 1440 dpi = 85039 pixels 
You'll be wanting a 9 giga-pixel camera then (yes, I did mean giga).
You're going to struggle to get an image with that much detail in it from any source. And then you'd struggle even more to find a PC/application that could cope with it!
Does sound like you could print your own custom wallpaper though
A high-res flatbed scanner would get you about half way there, but again we're talking serious amounts of data for a full A4 page at 3,600dpi (no point going beyond that into the interpolation zone) - 3.5GB
Being more practical, a 5M pixel digital camera would produce an image that when scaled to 1.5m high would have one pixel every 0.8mm (32dpi), which might not test the limits of the printer, but would probably look perfectly acceptable at the sort of range a banner would be viewed.
You'll be wanting a 9 giga-pixel camera then (yes, I did mean giga).
You're going to struggle to get an image with that much detail in it from any source. And then you'd struggle even more to find a PC/application that could cope with it!
Does sound like you could print your own custom wallpaper though
A high-res flatbed scanner would get you about half way there, but again we're talking serious amounts of data for a full A4 page at 3,600dpi (no point going beyond that into the interpolation zone) - 3.5GB
Being more practical, a 5M pixel digital camera would produce an image that when scaled to 1.5m high would have one pixel every 0.8mm (32dpi), which might not test the limits of the printer, but would probably look perfectly acceptable at the sort of range a banner would be viewed.
How about a gigapixel image?
The image isn't on the site, but you might be able to persuade him to send it to you to try it out, as he says: "I'm interested in hearing from anyone who would like to partner with me on printing this image. I think it would be an excellent match for (and an excellent demonstration of) large format printing technology."
Richard
The image isn't on the site, but you might be able to persuade him to send it to you to try it out, as he says: "I'm interested in hearing from anyone who would like to partner with me on printing this image. I think it would be an excellent match for (and an excellent demonstration of) large format printing technology."
Richard
You could try this, a high quality image with lots of tones, detail, specular highlights, no noise and a range of colours to test your printer.
You can download it here: here
Comes from a Phase One digital back (22mp £20,000) sample CD. The resolution yields a 60mb RGB file. I have compressed it at high quality (not the highest though) JPEG. The file is a 3mb download. I have also done a version resampled, called BIG, using Genuine Fractals, just under a metre on the shortest side. This is an 11mb download and yields a file of 320mb.
Both files are 240dpi which is an optimum resolution for a 1440 printer. 360 is better but i doubt you could tell the difference. I often print at 180 with great results. Try scaling it and lets us know the results.
You can download it here: here
Comes from a Phase One digital back (22mp £20,000) sample CD. The resolution yields a 60mb RGB file. I have compressed it at high quality (not the highest though) JPEG. The file is a 3mb download. I have also done a version resampled, called BIG, using Genuine Fractals, just under a metre on the shortest side. This is an 11mb download and yields a file of 320mb.
Both files are 240dpi which is an optimum resolution for a 1440 printer. 360 is better but i doubt you could tell the difference. I often print at 180 with great results. Try scaling it and lets us know the results.
Its extremely unlikely that your eye would be able to see a difference in quality between a 200 dpi image and a 300dpi one, let alone thousands of dpi so don't worry about the need to find a gigapixel image to test your printer !A 3200ppi scan of a medium format negative will probably be good enough.
I've printed a 35mm frame out 40" wide at a resolution of 120 dpi and couldn't see any problems even close up to it. Your printer driver software will probably do enough interpolation to give a jaggy-free image.
I've printed a 35mm frame out 40" wide at a resolution of 120 dpi and couldn't see any problems even close up to it. Your printer driver software will probably do enough interpolation to give a jaggy-free image.
I think the point here is that pixel resolution of an image (ppi) and dot resolution of a printer aren't a 1:1 ration.
When a printer says it's 1440dpi, that means it can project 1440 individual dots of ink onto each inch of paper. However, each dot is only going to be one colour of the 4/6 that your printer posesses. To make up the colour of one pixel of an image, the printer will need to place several dots of differing colours so that to the human eye it appears to be one, larger, dot of the right colour.
Hence Bacardi's point that an image with a ppi resolution of 240 or 360 will be ideal for printing at 1440dpi (gives 16 dots of ink per pixel @ 360ppi or 36 dots of ink per pixel @ 240ppi).
At least I think that's how it works.
When a printer says it's 1440dpi, that means it can project 1440 individual dots of ink onto each inch of paper. However, each dot is only going to be one colour of the 4/6 that your printer posesses. To make up the colour of one pixel of an image, the printer will need to place several dots of differing colours so that to the human eye it appears to be one, larger, dot of the right colour.
Hence Bacardi's point that an image with a ppi resolution of 240 or 360 will be ideal for printing at 1440dpi (gives 16 dots of ink per pixel @ 360ppi or 36 dots of ink per pixel @ 240ppi).
At least I think that's how it works.
Yes, you'd need to scan it in so that there are enough pixels for the 240ppi to be true at the desired output resolution. So if you wanted to double the size, you'd have to scan at 480ppi.
But, my point was more to point out the reason why you don't need a 1440ppi image to print to the best quality on a 1440dpi printer.
But, my point was more to point out the reason why you don't need a 1440ppi image to print to the best quality on a 1440dpi printer.
golfman said:
I have a new machine that can print up to 1.5m wide x 50m long on most materials including banners etc up to 1440dpi in full colour. Fully UV stable for outdoor use.
I want to run some high quality test prints but cannot find any very high resolution / high quality images.
Can anyone help? If so I would be willing to do some printing work for you!
Cheers.
I'm amazed at this spec, what sort of price are you likely to charge for a lifesize 1.5m by 3.5m canvas picture of a TVR for instance? What sort size would the picture need to be?
Thanks for all your input so far, all very interesting points. Its an amazing machine, I just took a 6 meg picture of my 5 year old daughter, measured her, printed her at exactly the same size, then took a picture of her with the picture, two daughters for the price of 1, she thought it was great! Better than scratching measurements of her height on the bedroom door, she now has a life size image of herself stuck on it!
Should any of you be passing by my neck of the woods you would be most welcome come and have a look (just off junction 11 M1).
Also I understand there is now some new interpolation software on the market that can increase image sizes whilst maintaining a quality far superior to what is the norm. Anyone know what it’s called?
Should any of you be passing by my neck of the woods you would be most welcome come and have a look (just off junction 11 M1).
Also I understand there is now some new interpolation software on the market that can increase image sizes whilst maintaining a quality far superior to what is the norm. Anyone know what it’s called?
There may be others but the interpolated sample I posted above (did you try a print with it, how did it look?) used 'Genuine Fractals' which I have found to be, on the whole, very good. Better than, and contrary to, samples on Fred Miranda's stair interpolation site. You will have to do your own tests and make your own mind up.
Generally, Genuine Fractals and S-Spline (now called shortcut zoom), work better on subjects with high contrast, sharp edges, buildings, machines, things with text in for example. Where they don't work so well is soft focus type images, where you would be better off sticking to Photoshop bicubic interpolation.
Some links:
www.lizardtech.com/
www.trulyphotomagic.com/shortcut/customer/
www.fredmiranda.com/SI/
Generally, Genuine Fractals and S-Spline (now called shortcut zoom), work better on subjects with high contrast, sharp edges, buildings, machines, things with text in for example. Where they don't work so well is soft focus type images, where you would be better off sticking to Photoshop bicubic interpolation.
Some links:
www.lizardtech.com/
www.trulyphotomagic.com/shortcut/customer/
www.fredmiranda.com/SI/
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff