Holy Cow! Mpix + Genuine Fractals = AMAZING

[wgilles]

As some of you may recall I wanted some opinions on a picture of my Dad's car that I was going to get blown up and made into a poster for him. Here is the pic: (minus some of the vignetting)

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Well, I used Genuine Fractals and blew it up almost 500% and ordered a huge print from Mpix. It only cost me about 40 bucks after lustre coating and shipping. Anyway, I got it in the mail today and all I have to say is WOW. It looks like that was the native resolution of the image, you can't tell it was blown up at all! If anyone is considering using Genuine Fractals and is curious of the results, don't be, it's amazing. And Mpix's printing quality is outstanding.

 

[Amarok]

oh my god that is a beautiful car...uh is Dad looking to adopt? lol...I use to work as a detailer at a Porsche dealer.

Really that is a beautiful shot of his car I'm sure he would love a poster print of that.

 

[wgilles]

Thanks for the comment, I went up on a ladder and secured my tripod to the ladder to get the shot!

 

[fitzz47]

I use Mpix and love them.

 

[JessP7]

I use Mpix a lot too, but I have never gotten very large prints done. I may just have to try that. I am in need of a few last minute gifts...

 

[hotrod4x5]

I would be very interested in seeing you do a test, send them just a full resolution JPEG, without using GF upsizing and see how they compare. Do all the same things you did, such as sharpening, but just skip the upsize.

I have this discussion a lot. Some of my friends like full control, and they want to upsize. Others say the lab has multi thousand dollar software for ripping files up, so they let them do the upsizing.

I have had some awesome large prints made from my D200, and I don't usually upsize before sending the file.

 

[Kiwi Geoff]

Agreed with that Rodney. My experience is it's best to leave to the experts.

 

[Philippe Roger]

I would be very interested in seeing you do a test, send them just a full resolution JPEG, without using GF upsizing and see how they compare. Do all the same things you did, such as sharpening, but just skip the upsize.

I have this discussion a lot. Some of my friends like full control, and they want to upsize. Others say the lab has multi thousand dollar software for ripping files up, so they let them do the upsizing.

I have had some awesome large prints made from my D200, and I don't usually upsize before sending the file.

Right. I had 4MP images printed at 16x24 at Mpix, sent as full resolution JPEG with no upsizing, and they looked wonderful. Their instructions actually say that the user shouldn't upsize... I'll bet that their RIP is as good as GF, and you save a lot in bandwidth (and therefore time), by letting them do the upsizing. Note for example that Mpix printers print at 200 ppi, so any upsizing above that would be wasted anyway.

 

[Electromen]

I would be very interested in seeing you do a test, send them just a full resolution JPEG, without using GF upsizing and see how they compare. Do all the same things you did, such as sharpening, but just skip the upsize.

I have this discussion a lot. Some of my friends like full control, and they want to upsize. Others say the lab has multi thousand dollar software for ripping files up, so they let them do the upsizing.

I have had some awesome large prints made from my D200, and I don't usually upsize before sending the file.

Rodney, Where the heck have you been?

 

[wgilles]

I just don't know how much better it can get. Maybe I will try it when I get some extra cash.

 

[Flew]

Will,

Very nice car, and a good image of it. I know that your dad will be thrilled.

You have me curious though. Can you post a link the Mpix?

Thanks,

 

[hotrod4x5]

Will,

Very nice car, and a good image of it. I know that your dad will be thrilled.

You have me curious though. Can you post a link the Mpix?

Thanks,

www.mpix.com

 

[Michael Mohrmann]

I had 4MP images printed at 16x24 at Mpix, sent as full resolution JPEG with no upsizing, and they looked wonderful.

That comes out to about 100 ppi for a 4MP image printed at 16x24. Does this also work for smaller printed sizes? I am trying to learn how much I can crop a D700 image and still produce a quality print at say 8x10.

 

[hotrod4x5]

That comes out to about 100 ppi for a 4MP image printed at 16x24. Does this also work for smaller printed sizes? I am trying to learn how much I can crop a D700 image and still produce a quality print at say 8x10.

What exactly do you mean "how to crop a D700 file?"

You mean how many pixels do you need minimum for a good 8x10? MPIX FAQ says they want at least 800x1000 pixels for an 8x10, but why short change? I usually crop my 8x10s to 2400x3000.

 

[Michael Mohrmann]

What exactly do you mean "how to crop a D700 file?"

You mean how many pixels do you need minimum for a good 8x10? MPIX FAQ says they want at least 800x1000 pixels for an 8x10, but why short change? I usually crop my 8x10s to 2400x3000.

Not "how to", but "how much can I". I think the answer you gave is 100 ppi, although more is better. Ideally, it is best to frame the image as you want when you take the photo. But there are times where you want to print only a portion of the image.

 

[hotrod4x5]

Michael PPI isn't really important for lab prints. What is really important is the pixel count. You can have 2000x3000 pixels at 100PPI and 2000x3000 pixels at 300PPI, and they are they same file, pixels are pixels, one just would make a larger print if you were using an inkjet to print.

I suppose that yes, MPIX is saying 100PPI is minimum, but I concern myself with pixel count more.