EPTTBLS Poster - Page 2
| Blogs > Kiett |
|
Pvvned
United States405 Posts
| ||
fishuu
United States369 Posts
| ||
|
ellerina
Philippines452 Posts
| ||
ArvickHero
10387 Posts
 | ||
|
Necosarius
Sweden4042 Posts
| ||
|
Risen
United States7927 Posts
 | ||
|
Piste
6174 Posts
| ||
|
BroodWarHD
136 Posts
| ||
|
endy
Switzerland8970 Posts
| ||
|
Chef
10810 Posts
Size: I went for 3000x2000, which should be 42x27 inches when printed. That ought to make a decent sized poster. Kiett, I really love this idea and appreciate the effort you are putting into to doing it I too will print it out, however before you get your hopes too high I should tell you that printing a photo on paper is not like seeing it on a screen. Typically you want at least 250-300 pixels per inch, which with your intended dimensions will only be 10 by 6.6 inches. Not too bad, but not the giant poster you are envisioning. Since it is a drawing and not a photo I don't know how that would impact the results, but I know I've been pretty disappointed when my DSLR (which only shoots 3000 by 2000) looked off on 11 by 8.5 premium photopaper (especially if I cropped the image to fit). There's also the option, I suppose, of using a vector program to try to increase the size of the picture (which I think works well with logos?), but I'm not sure if it'll work with your image.Best, edit: I tried a 640/640 drawing (jaedong being carried by an overlord lol) print on 4in / 6in paper... Which is 160 pixels per inch. It looks alright so you might be able to get away with more for a drawing than a photo. Regardless, if you find you have problems printing your image really big, keep in mind it might not be ink or other error, but error in resolution. Hope this is helpful to you.. edit2: printing a picture of a frog a 120 dpi is approaching the limit. Looking closely you can see the pixels, but from 2-3 feet away it is not very noticeable. So I would say a maximum for 3000/2000 is 25 inch by 16 inch, if you don't mind that when you stand very close to the poster you will see problems. Keep in mind my frog cartoon picture looks very good on the computer monitor at a larger size than it does on paper... This should give you some sense anyhow of the perils of digital printing (believe me I've printed big pictures and done a million things trying to figure out the problem before finally realising it was the resolution after wasting tonnes of ink). | ||
|
Kiett
United States7639 Posts
On November 20 2011 00:02 Chef wrote: Kiett, I really love this idea and appreciate the effort you are putting into to doing it I too will print it out, however before you get your hopes too high I should tell you that printing a photo on paper is not like seeing it on a screen. Typically you want at least 250-300 pixels per inch, which with your intended dimensions will only be 10 by 6.6 inches. Not too bad, but not the giant poster you are envisioning. Since it is a drawing and not a photo I don't know how that would impact the results, but I know I've been pretty disappointed when my DSLR (which only shoots 3000 by 2000) looked off on 11 by 8.5 premium photopaper (especially if I cropped the image to fit). There's also the option, I suppose, of using a vector program to try to increase the size of the picture (which I think works well with logos?), but I'm not sure if it'll work with your image.Best, edit: I tried a 640/640 drawing (jaedong being carried by an overlord lol) print on 4in / 6in paper... Which is 160 pixels per inch. It looks alright so you might be able to get away with more for a drawing than a photo. Regardless, if you find you have problems printing your image really big, keep in mind it might not be ink or other error, but error in resolution. Hope this is helpful to you.. edit2: printing a picture of a frog a 120 dpi is approaching the limit. Looking closely you can see the pixels, but from 2-3 feet away it is not very noticeable. So I would say a maximum for 3000/2000 is 25 inch by 16 inch, if you don't mind that when you stand very close to the poster you will see problems. Keep in mind my frog cartoon picture looks very good on the computer monitor at a larger size than it does on paper... This should give you some sense anyhow of the perils of digital printing (believe me I've printed big pictures and done a million things trying to figure out the problem before finally realising it was the resolution after wasting tonnes of ink). Oh, really??? DDD: I didn't realize that it'd need to be 250-300 DPI to look good... I kind of just went with the default option on photoshop, which I now realize is only 72 DPI T__T Thanks for letting me know now, before I got too far lol. So for a 2ft by 3ft poster, what size would you suggest? | ||
|
keiraknightlee
United States301 Posts
 | ||
|
Chef
10810 Posts
On November 20 2011 03:15 Kiett wrote: Oh, really??? DDD: I didn't realize that it'd need to be 250-300 DPI to look good... I kind of just went with the default option on photoshop, which I now realize is only 72 DPI T__T Thanks for letting me know now, before I got too far lol. So for a 2ft by 3ft poster, what size would you suggest? The safe side is 300 dpi. 300 x 36 = 10800 by 7200. You could get away with less probably as you'll see in my edits, but 300 dpi is what I've read is recommended for 'professional quality' prints. Keep in mind I am no expert, but it's been my experience that when you start to print with lower dpi, the pictures do not look at sharp. In some things it is not very important, in others it is critical. I'm not sure how much it matters for you (in terms of work) if you have more pixels.. My printer is capable of 600 dpi which may be even better, but there is probably a limit to the human eye, you know? If it is not difficult at all to draw on a huge image (as in your tools don't care) then you could go even more than what I said if you want to be super safe. Maybe there is someone else on this forum with more experience than I in printing posters who can verify what I'm saying. | ||
|
onewingedmoogle
Canada434 Posts
| ||
|
GenesisX
Canada4267 Posts
| ||
|
]343[
United States10328 Posts
| ||
|
superarmy
New Zealand422 Posts
| ||
|
Kiett
United States7639 Posts
On December 24 2011 19:11 superarmy wrote: Any progress? Unfortunately, being informed that I'd have to restart this at a new size kind of ruined my motivation to work on it, haha. That, and my computer broke down on me on my flight home from Korea, so I won't be able to work on anything that requires Photoshop until it gets fixed. Possibly in January when I get back to school, I'll take this up again. My apologies :< | ||
|
iSometric
2221 Posts
| ||
|
hazelynut
United States2195 Posts
| ||
| ||
