Is 24 Mp Camera Good For 13x19 Prints

13x19" prints - how many megapixels?

Nov 7, 2011

so, i take made 13x19" prints of the aforementioned bones shot made past nikon D100 (6mp), D200 (10mp), panasonic FX100 (12mp), and nikon D2x (12mp). the image is a well-lit outdoor scene, then any significant difference at high ISO is non reflected. from my viewing of these prints, there is hardly a nickel's worth of difference between whatsoever of them. oddly, the best looking print came from the little panasonic.

has this been your feel?
--
jnorman
sunridge studios
salem, oregon
D2x, nikon 12-24mm ED-IF AF-S DX, 18-70mm DX
Cambo 45NX, nikkor SW ninety/8, 135/v.6, 210/5.6
Graflex Crown Graphic 4x5 (1948 model)

Re: 13x19" prints - how many megapixels?

I've been happily making large prints from 6Mp cameras for years, It'due south all downward to viewing distance. If you lot just look at the image as a whole then regardless of what size you impress at information technology will exist fine. The closer y'all desire to view a large print from then the more megapixels you need to testify detail at that scale. Nonetheless you stop looking at the image as a whole when y'all go that close.

The normal guideline for a high quality impress that will be viewed from close upwards is between 200dpi and 300 dpi.

The further away you wait to view from the smaller that dpi number can be. Think about what dpi you might demand for a large advertising hoarding at the side of a road.

-- hide signature --

StephenG

Simon97 • Veteran Fellow member • Posts: 3,368

Re: 13x19" prints - how many megapixels?

Even at depression ISO, most compact cameras accept NR going on that affects fine detail, simply the fashion the colors and contrast are rendered may wait better to almost people at normal viewing differences. Under shut inspection, the larger sensor cameras may expect improve fifty-fifty with less resolution and they give so much leeway in processing.

I can't speak for your examples having not seen them.

Canon PowerShot ELPH 360 HS Panasonic Lumix DC-G100

Re: 13x19" prints - how many megapixels?

In reply to Simon97 • Nov vii, 2011

simon - you lot are correct, and generally, deposition of fine detail can be fairly obvious on a reckoner screen at 100% crop levels. even so, what i am finding is that this not necessarily relevant to prints at the 13x19" scale.
--
jnorman
sunridge studios
salem, oregon
D2x, nikon 12-24mm ED-IF AF-Due south DX, 18-70mm DX
Cambo 45NX, nikkor SW 90/8, 135/v.vi, 210/five.6
Graflex Crown Graphic 4x5 (1948 model)

tkbslc • Forum Pro • Posts: 17,049

Re: 13x19" prints - how many megapixels?

I am sure someone volition tell you that a good impress simply has to be 300dpi. 300dpi x 19" = 5700px wide, or most a 22MP camera.

I've constitute that 150dpi often looks just as practiced as 300DPI in one case you lot hang it on the wall, and the biggest factor is the quality of the photo in the first place.

Frida • Regular Member • Posts: 259

100ppi is my standard.

In reply to tkbslc • Nov 7, 2011

Under that, I'yard happy to print at up to 46 x 31 on my D3100. However, the largest I conceptualize press for my family or for clients is 20 10 thirty, since things get pricey beyond that mark. Still, by my standard, fifty-fifty my v yr quondam FZ7 is good for a 20 10 thirty, since it's outfitted with roughly 2100 x 2800 pixels. That kind of makes y'all recall about the merits of endlessly chasing megapixels rather than focusing on composing attractive pictures in the first identify.

Re: 13x19" prints - how many megapixels?

The FX100 was a pretty proficient model and I'grand not surprised that it give skilful images. Corner sharpness wasn't that great if I call back correctly, but IQ at iso 100 was generally good. Small noise processing artefacts and racket that are like shooting fish in a barrel to come across on screen in 100% seem to more often than not disappear in prints.

I'd expect FX100 IQ to be fairly competitive every bit long as the scene don't take likewise high DR, but I'd be surprised that it'd await better than a 10MP or 12MP dSLR. It would of course depend on the lens, just processing is also importnat and P&Southward cameras usually accept more in camera sharpening applied than dSLRs. Saturation and dissimilarity are often higher as well. Basically P&S JPGs are processed incamera to be ready for utilize, while dSLRS often produce JPGs that need some postprocessing to look right.

Yous don't say how yous shot the images (RAW/JPG), if y'all tried to equalize DOF and what postprocessing you lot've done. These are all factors that will influence the last impress.

brucet • Veteran Fellow member • Posts: 3,985

Re: 13x19" prints - how many megapixels?

I'thou not sure what the 'correct' way of doing things are but hither's what I do and think!

My printer volition print A3 and A3+. (Epson 1410). I use a 24' screen and employ PSPx4. When I zoom into my work at 30% I go an on screen view size that exactly matches the size of an A3. (Approx 4900x3200 from a tiff of 92meg from a RAW of 20meg out of a xvi meg D7000!!!). If I'm happy with what I see and so I print knowing that the print will give a more pleasing effect than the screen.

At present if I repeat the exercise using my Fuji S100fs I tin can get near the same results.

The reality is that unless I intend to put nose prints on my photos anything over ten one thousand thousand is no big bargain. Besides I think that there are many more than factors that make for a great photo than only megapixels.

Nikon D7100 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor xviii-105mm F3.5-5.6G ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G Tokina AT-Ten Pro 12-24mm f/4 DX Ii Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm F1.8G

glasswave • Forum Pro • Posts: 10,341

audiences accept little respect for veiwing distance...

From what I've observed, audiences have niggling respect for viewing distance.

I hear a lot of banter about having less demand for sharpness as print size increases. While this may be true for billboards and such, I recall it's a bit of a generalization. If people never approached large prints to examine them in detail, we could likely be entirely satisfied with or 12mp so resolution, regardless of print size.

In my anecdotal experience, I discover viewing altitude to have only trivial relation to print size. I find that viewing distance seems more related to the viewer'south environmental restrictions and to a lesser degree subject field affair. In museums, galleries and homes I often discover viewers will walk right up to images or paintings to examine specific parts in detail, especially with detailed landscapes or architecture. This is less so with human faces where people prefer to remain a comfy altitude. I've fifty-fifty seen people crane over tables & couches to get a closer look at diverse quite large hanging artworks. With mural size prints, I oftentimes come across people walking along viewing them in sections. It seems to me that merely when restricted by foam ropes, high image placement or other environmental variables will people remain at the optimal viewing distance for the entire epitome.

Strangely, I don't seem to notice this tendency with on screen graphics. People tend to stay at a distance where they can assimilate the unabridged screen & don't approach more closely.

Thus, I believe that viewing distance can't always exist predicted by the size of the image and the quest for more than detail at larger print sizes remains a valid pursuit.

sjgcit wrote:

I've been happily making large prints from 6Mp cameras for years, It'southward all downwardly to viewing distance. If you lot simply expect at the paradigm equally a whole and then regardless of what size you print at it will be fine. The closer you desire to view a large print from then the more megapixels you need to show particular at that calibration. Notwithstanding you terminate looking at the image as a whole when you lot get that shut.

The normal guideline for a high quality print that will be viewed from shut up is between 200dpi and 300 dpi.

The further away y'all expect to view from the smaller that dpi number can be. Think about what dpi y'all might need for a large advertizing hoarding at the side of a road.

-- hibernate signature --

At that place is simply likewise much dazzler in the globe to photograph it all, but I'm trying.

glasswave • Forum Pro • Posts: 10,341

Re: Most images will look their all-time at 200dpi...

....while a select few images (those that are super precipitous, loftier contrast and take geometric diagonal lines) require 240dpi for optimal output quaility more than 200dpi (8mp for a 12x18) is seldom needed. Below about 150 dpi resolution atrifacts can go very apparent on most images. OTH, some images (a sunset of soft wispy clouds) tin can be printed at very depression resolution (sub 120dpi) before resolution artifacts (pixelization) becomes readily visible.

These artifacts can be disguised somewhat be upsampling and sharpening techniques, but often upon close test a general muddiness can be observed.

For 12x18, 8mp is generally enough, but for 20x30, 24mp is very helpful. Large print sizes put greater demands on the entire print making cycle and abrupt lenses, high shutter speeds, practiced lighting, tripods, and post processing etc become more and more important in terms of producing a high quality epitome.

james b norman wrote:

so, i have fabricated 13x19" prints of the same basic shot fabricated past nikon D100 (6mp), D200 (10mp), panasonic FX100 (12mp), and nikon D2x (12mp). the paradigm is a well-lit outdoor scene, so whatever significant departure at high ISO is not reflected. from my viewing of these prints, there is hardly a nickel's worth of difference between any of them. oddly, the all-time looking impress came from the lilliputian panasonic.

has this been your experience?
--
jnorman
sunridge studios
salem, oregon
D2x, nikon 12-24mm ED-IF AF-Southward DX, 18-70mm DX
Cambo 45NX, nikkor SW 90/eight, 135/v.6, 210/v.vi
Graflex Crown Graphic 4x5 (1948 model)

-- hibernate signature --

There is simply too much beauty in the world to photo information technology all, but I'm trying.

Re: 13x19" prints - how many megapixels?

In reply to tkbslc • Nov 8, 2011

tkbslc wrote:

I am sure someone will tell you that a good print just has to be 300dpi. 300dpi x xix" = 5700px broad, or nearly a 22MP photographic camera.

I've constitute that 150dpi frequently looks simply as practiced as 300DPI in one case you lot hang it on the wall, and the biggest gene is the quality of the photo in the first place.

This has a lot to do with the fact that printers are quite express in how finely they can print, with the huge dithering matrices that they use, and resample to.

If y'all had a printer that actually made a solid color dot the needed size of an original pixel, I bet that y'all'd see a tremendous divergence.

If you imagine limits to practical photography based on current display limitations, you may exist disappointed with your former pictures when a revolution occurs in brandish engineering science.

-- hide signature --

John

glasswave • Forum Pro • Posts: x,341

Re: It's pretty much the same for continous tone printers...

...200 to 240 dpi is more than enough for well-nigh any photo, mostly due to aberrations introduced in the photo graphic process. Vector graphics and cg is a unlike story though. Perfectly formed vector graphics and even some types of scanned images readily prove resolution artifacts on contone printers between 300 & 600 dpi.

John Sheehy wrote:

tkbslc wrote:

I am sure someone volition tell you that a practiced print just has to be 300dpi. 300dpi 10 19" = 5700px broad, or about a 22MP photographic camera.

I've plant that 150dpi often looks just every bit good as 300DPI one time you hang it on the wall, and the biggest factor is the quality of the photo in the first place.

This has a lot to do with the fact that printers are quite limited in how finely they can print, with the huge dithering matrices that they use, and resample to.

If you lot had a printer that really made a solid color dot the needed size of an original pixel, I bet that you'd see a tremendous deviation.

If you imagine limits to practical photography based on current display limitations, you may exist disappointed with your sometime pictures when a revolution occurs in display technology.

-- hide signature --

There is only too much beauty in the globe to photo information technology all, but I'm trying.

Zone8 • Forum Pro • Posts: 17,276

I just got 1 of my prints and constitute ....

... there were 14,873,089½ pixels. Heed you, I might have miscounted as needed a pee halfway through.

Re: 13x19" prints - how many megapixels?

In reply to brucet • Nov 8, 2011

brucet - "I use a 24' screen"

24 feet? sweeeeet!!!!!
--
jnorman
sunridge studios
salem, oregon
D2x, nikon 12-24mm ED-IF AF-Southward DX, eighteen-70mm DX
Cambo 45NX, nikkor SW 90/8, 135/five.6, 210/5.six
Graflex Crown Graphic 4x5 (1948 model)

The larger the print...the clsoer people will become to inspect it.

Canon PowerShot G3 Nikon Coolpix 950 Olympus E-x Canon PowerShot SX150 IS Canon EOS D30 +10 more

I can get by with 200ppi. I adopt 240 for detailed, large prints.

That said, one time 10mp DSLRs were available, nosotros could produce swell 13x19 prints.

Canon PowerShot G3 Nikon Coolpix 950 Olympus E-x Canon PowerShot SX150 IS Canon EOS D30 +10 more

brucet • Veteran Member • Posts: 3,985

Re: 13x19" prints - how many megapixels?

Err oops. Has very LARGE pixels?

At to the lowest degree I now know someone reads my posts.

Cheers.

Nikon D7100 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-105mm F3.five-5.6G ED VR Nikon AF-Due south DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G Tokina AT-Ten Pro 12-24mm f/iv DX II Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm F1.8G

Re: 13x19" prints - how many megapixels?

In reply to brucet • November 9, 2011

Someone will always read a mail with a mistake in information technology.