Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

image size for 2 meters

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • image size for 2 meters

    Hi I am working on banner design which is little more than 2.5 meters. Images in stock shops are up 5000 pixels. Is an image about 4752x3168 pixels @ 300 dpi large enough for a print that big?

  • #2
    * IF an image...

    Comment


    • #3
      2.5 meters in which direction?
      And how big in the other???

      You need to learn to do the math.

      Your image is 15.8" x 10.56" (40.1cm x 26.8cm) @ 300ppi. (That's PPI, not DPI.)
      Depending on your viewing distance, the answer is, it depends. Actually the answer depends on what you are doing with the image.

      At about 10' viewing distance your image can be about 63.4" x 42.2" (1.61m x 1.07m) @ 75ppi
      At about 20' viewing distance your image can be about 95" x 63.3" (2.4m x 1.6m) @ 50ppi
      Over 20' of viewing distance you can probably get away with 135.8 x 90.5" (2.4m x 1.6m) @ 35ppi.

      If you are only using a small portion of the image and blowing it up large, you may run out of resolution faster than described.
      There's nothing that says a single image has to cover the whole banner either...

      When printing banners, usually you don't need to go over 100ppi to begin with. Most often the range is around 50-80ppi. Theatrical distances (like for stage backdrops or arena banners) gets down around 35ppi. I've done backdrops for video at 25ppi and so blurry you don't even know what they are until you see them on camera.










      Last edited by PrintDriver; 09-15-2017, 05:45 AM.

      Comment


      • #4
        Hi Coloredcoffee and welcome to GDF.

        We ask all new members to read very important links here and here. These explain the rules, how the forum runs and a few inside jokes. No, you haven't done anything wrong, we ask every new member to read them. Your first few posts will be moderated, so don't panic if they don't show up immediately. Enjoy your stay.
        Shop smart. Shop S-Mart.

        Comment


        • #5
          The wonders of mathematics! I went back to school in my mid 20's for math. Gotta love it.
          Print Driver has it broken down perfectly for you. If i'm not mistake, wide format and signage is his specialty.

          He's a bit of terminology for you.

          Although both DPI and PPI in a sense are telling you a resolution or clarity of an image.
          PPi or Pixels per inch is literally speaking to you the amount of pixels in an image, where DPI only applies to print output. how many DOTS per inch an imagine will be rendered when it's outputted by some time of hardware.

          You also have LPI, or lines per inch (doesn't apply here) - but another day perhaps.

          Comment


          • #6
            Heading off on a tangent here, but I'd almost like to see DPI dropped from the vocabulary of most designers. Almost every reference to DPI (generally hardcopy output resolution) is actually referring to PPI (image resolution) or LPI (halftone dot frequency).

            Comment


            • HotButton
              HotButton commented
              Editing a comment
              I'd drop at least 612 likes on this if i could. Anyone presenting themselves as a graphics professional and talking image resolution in DPI instantly loses my respect. Generally speaking, language accuracy has been steadily losing ground since I was a child, accelerating considerably in the last 10 years. I beg you, my fellow practitioners, do not contribute to this intellectual degeneration. /tangent

            • PrintDriver
              PrintDriver commented
              Editing a comment
              In Wide Format they can't drop the dpi, unfortunately.
              DPI is a reference to printer speed/quality.
              As a for instance, on the Roland Versacamm 300 (a printer someone asked about here recently)
              you get these speeds/dpi resolutions
              High Speed 540dpi x 720dpi 5 passes 106 ft2/h
              Standard 720dpi x 720dpi 6 passes 88 ft2/h
              High Quality 1440dp x 720dpi 6 passes 39 ft2/h
              You'll notice that you can get varying dpi in the head travel and the step direction.
              You'll also notice the precipitous drop in thru-put speed. You WILL pay more for a higher dpi print.

              When buying a printer you'll usually only hear about the ''blazing fast speed'' but in a lot of instances, that is not a sellable print.
              So yeah, dpi is still important.

            • B
              B commented
              Editing a comment
              DPI has always been a confusingly malleable term.

              I date back before digital and before desktop publishing. Back then, DPI was typically thought of as the number of halftone dots in a linear inch, which probably wasn't all that appropriate either since lines per inch (LPI) was also used.

              The DPI (or LPI) was one of those things you needed to specify when something was sent out to a color house to be separated or a contact screen was chosen for a process or stat camera to make a halftone. Depending on the printing (offset, letterpress, rotogravure, etc.) and the paper, one might choose anywhere 90-lpi to 150-lpi. Today I don't think hardly any designers specify the LPI for a job -- they just take whatever the printer decides, which might not even involve halftone dot frequencies in the case of stochastic halftones or digital printing.

              Going off on a second tangent... I have much the same kind of terminology pet peeve regarding typeface vs. font. For example, Helvetica and Baskerville are the names of typefaces, not fonts. A complete collection of all the glyphs within a typeface, whether it's a digital file or metal letters in a drawer, is the font.

              Like with DPI, PPI and LPI, the typeface vs font confusion arose out of changing technology when the difference between a typeface and a font was critical. For example, a hundred years ago, one guy in a print shop might say to another, ''The client wants this set in a grotesque agate typeface, in which cabinet did you put the font.''

          • #7
            About 5 years ago for an internal project I had to produce (and then get printed) 10 panels that were 3' wide by 8' tall. So, about as large as you're discussing (as far as height). And our brand used full bleed photography. The client was sure there was a way to print them where they'd be "clear" when you're standing right up near them. In the end I made her happy by finding images that were well lit, and therefore has less grain in them to start with.

            Now, if you have access to, or hire a photographer with the latest and greatest DSLR, you can get bigger images. A quick search show that the CANON 5DS DSLR camera can produce a 5792x8658 pixel image (at least that was the size of a sample I grabbed form Canon's site)

            But with the right "low grain" well lit stock images you should be able to get a reasonable print out at that size if being seen form a distance of 6-10 feet.
            __________________________________________________
            I like to beat up pacifists, because they don't fight back ...

            N.A.N.K.A. "We Kick Because We Care."

            Comment


            • #8
              The thing about stock images, I've found, is that some photographers aren't shy about messing with their resolution, claiming it's higher than it really is while attempting to cover with blur or noise. On more than one occasion I've contacted stock companies to get a refund on images that were less than stellar.

              You can muck around with interpolating resolution a bit to get where you need, but as Craig points out, the success you have will totally depend on the image (and the camera.)

              Comment


              • HotButton
                HotButton commented
                Editing a comment
                This is also an important point. Image resolution is only a measure of pixel density, not image quality. It's entirely possible, if not common, to have an absolutely horrible image with more than enough resolution to print it just as horribly.

            • #9
              KitchWitch heY dude ..why you've changed your dp !! previous ones was my favorite

              Comment


              • B
                B commented
                Editing a comment
                I like it!

              • PrintDriver
                PrintDriver commented
                Editing a comment
                Maybe Kitch got tired of, ''Hey Dude!''

              • KitchWitch
                KitchWitch commented
                Editing a comment
                I got an app on my phone that produces tons of images based on a character you create. Thought I'd make my avatar match my ginger mod title, lol.

            • #10
              The original image was at 500 ppi 2667x4000 pixels when I opened. The banner is 2.5x3.3 meters. Before I placed it on 150 ppi document I first changed the the image size at 110% and did this several times (or a lot of times) with bicubic smoother option. I actually created an action for this. Then when I got the size I needed I moved it to the 150 ppi document. Is this a correct way to transform images?

              Comment


              • #11
                Aaargh....
                No.
                Interpolating an image is still interpolating an image. You can't increase the resolution. You can make PHotoshop guess what the missing pixels are, but it's all still a guess. I haven't found that you get a measureably better result from incremental rez-ups than you do from one full step. Photoshop is pretty sophisticated in that respect these days. But it is still guessing and unless you are going to do a little manipulation to slightly blur that guessing, you may end up with some fairly nasty edge artifacts (depending on the original source image of course.)

                You started with a 13.55 x 20.32cm image at 500ppi and you are taking it up to 2.5x3.3meters?
                Divide 250 by 13.55 = 18.45.
                Now divide the starting resolution by 18.45
                You are going to be at about 27ppi. Add in your bleeds (Do NOT forget your bleeds) and you are at more like 25ppi.

                The only thing I can suggest after wasting all that time doing step interpolation is to try printing out a section of it that you can recognize on your desktop inkjet and see what it looks like. A desktop inkjet pretty closely approximates the type of print resolution you will get on a banner.
                Just a note here that your aspect ration is wrong for the size of your banner. 18.45 x 20.32 is 375cm. Unless you need 22cm top and bottom for some reason.

                It sounds like you are creating this banner in Photoshop at 150ppi. That is way high for resolution for a banner.
                Go read my post below again. The math and the viewing distances are in there.
                The problem with doing this in photoshop is that any text will rasterize at the resolution of the file. If you want nice clean sharp text, you want to be using a layout program. Indesign or Illustrator.

                DO NOT FORGET YOUR BLEEDS. They will be larger than you think and especially where you are doing this in Photoshop.
                Last edited by PrintDriver; 09-20-2017, 12:03 PM.

                Comment


                • coloredcoffee
                  coloredcoffee commented
                  Editing a comment
                  the image had to be cropped to fit the banner size. Yes, I know, that makes it worse. Thank you PrintDriver for explaining me with detail. Where does the number 250 come from? I have a lot to learn.

                • coloredcoffee
                  coloredcoffee commented
                  Editing a comment
                  the client only wants to decorate a wall with a huge image. No text. I had it print only a piece and actual size of that piece. it looks, well, blurry. But he did printed a part of the image where it has the depth of the street (which obviously might be blurrier)

                • coloredcoffee
                  coloredcoffee commented
                  Editing a comment
                  Ok, so I understand some parts, but still a bit confused. :-o If I were to ask you to print this banner for me, what would I need to give you? A 2.5X3.3 meter file at 25 ppi?

              • #12
                so, just change the resolution?
                Attached Files

                Comment


                • #13
                  There are 250cm in 2.5 meters, right?

                  You are doing this for a paying client?

                  Are you really doing a banner? Or a wall mural. The difference matters.
                  A banner usually hangs overhead or at a distance. The resolution can be lower as it isn't being looked at close up. A wall mural is meant to be beautiful and looked at from eye level, usually less than 15ft (less than 3 meters) but sometimes you take into consideration how much of it can be viewed from how far back in the room or hallway. For this kind of work, you have to specifically seek out images that are very high in resolution and you don't crop em down and you don't do unnecessary effects unless called for in the design.

                  For a wall mural I'd recommend trying for 75ppi UNINTERPOLATED. That means no attempting to rez up. You might go as low as 50 if viewing distance permits, 35 if doing dye sub on fabric but not inkjet on vinyl. 25ppi is for something being viewed from very far away, say something like 10m. You might get away with some minor interpolation if you just need to bump it a few ppi. But in the end, it all depends on what the client will accept, and that might mean getting a full scale section of the thing printed as a proof. Something 1m x 1m maybe, and putting it on the wall and having a look.

                  Are you providing the print? Do you have a print vendor lined up yet?
                  You should discuss with them what you need for bleeds and what they suggest for optimum resolution for end purpose (though I have run into print vendors that think 150ppi is THE answer for everything, when it is not...)

                  Comment


                  • #14
                    The banner is completed. Client is satisfied. I was doing this to help another designer and I sent the image at 2.5x3.3 meters at 150 ppi for print. I was wondering if I was doing this right and this is why I came to GraphicDesignForum to ask. Maybe I could change the way I resized the image and send it again. I was reading the replies and asking because I really am interested in doing things the right way and understand more. The client wanted a simple but big banner of an image to hang on a wall with close viewing distance. That is why I was a bit concern about this image because it basically small. But client wanted that image. The banner was printed on vinyl. But , I am still curious. Was the image way to small for resize that large and close view? Print Driver mentions "For this kind of work, you have to specifically seek out images that are very high in resolution and you don't crop em down and you don't do unnecessary effects unless called for in the design."

                    Comment


                    • #15
                      Anyway, just a little while ago I asked if the banner was printed and they said yes and client is satisfied. So it is a bit late to redo this job.

                      Comment

                      Search

                      Collapse

                      Sponsor

                      Collapse

                      Incredible Stock

                      Latest Topics

                      Collapse

                      GDF A division of Mediabistro Holdings Adweek | Mediabistro | Clio | Film Expo Group Contact Us | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy Copyright 2016 Mediabistro Holdings
                      Working...
                      X