Actual Size when blown up to 200 DPI Resolution?

C2
Posted By
condor_222
Sep 11, 2006
Views
804
Replies
20
Status
Closed
Dear Experts,

Now that I’ve got my Nikon D70, and taken a few hundred pictures, I want to make a t shirt from one of the images.

The t shirt people have given me some specs. The image needs to be 200 DPI or more when it is blown up full size on the t shirt.

I shot everything in L size. The specs for the Nikon D70 are:

Image Size (pixels): 3008 x 2000 [L], 2240 x 1448 [M], 1504 x 1000 [S] Image Sensor: RGB CCD, 23.7 x 15.6 mm; total pixels: 6.24 million Effective Pixels: 6.1 million

Who knows how to calculate? Just how big could I blow up a Large image if I took it to the 200 DPI limit?
15 inches on the long edge?

Here’s a bonus question. I also took pictures in 35mm.
If they are scanned at 4000 dpi, how big can I blow them up to stay within the 200 dpi limit? 20 inches?

Thanks a lot!

How to Master Sharpening in Photoshop

Give your photos a professional finish with sharpening in Photoshop. Learn to enhance details, create contrast, and prepare your images for print, web, and social media.

J
Jim
Sep 11, 2006
wrote in message
Dear Experts,

Now that I’ve got my Nikon D70, and taken a few hundred pictures, I want to make a t shirt from one of the images.

The t shirt people have given me some specs. The image needs to be 200 DPI or more when it is blown up full size on the t shirt.

I shot everything in L size. The specs for the Nikon D70 are:
Image Size (pixels): 3008 x 2000 [L], 2240 x 1448 [M], 1504 x 1000 [S] Image Sensor: RGB CCD, 23.7 x 15.6 mm; total pixels: 6.24 million Effective Pixels: 6.1 million
It would be 3008/200 on the long size and 2000/200 on the short side.
Who knows how to calculate? Just how big could I blow up a Large image if I took it to the 200 DPI limit?
15 inches on the long edge?

Here’s a bonus question. I also took pictures in 35mm.
If they are scanned at 4000 dpi, how big can I blow them up to stay within the 200 dpi limit? 20 inches?
Obtain the actual image size because a 35mm image is less than 1×1.5 inches, and then do the math.
Jim
Thanks a lot!
SB
Stan Beck
Sep 11, 2006
An image of 3008 x 2000 shot/saved at 300 dpi, will become roughly 10" x 15" if it is converted to 200 dpi, if done WITHOUT resampling of the image.

(I’m using Photoshop)

The simplest thing is to shoot at the max size and resolution, and give them the image from your camera – they know how to do all of that.

Just for information, if you take 3008 pixels and divide by 300 dpi, the result is 10.


Honest technical and artistic critiques welcomed.

Stan Beck > From New Orleans to Brandon MS
To reply, remove 101 from address.
***

"Jim" wrote in message
wrote in message
Dear Experts,

Now that I’ve got my Nikon D70, and taken a few hundred pictures, I want to make a t shirt from one of the images.

The t shirt people have given me some specs. The image needs to be 200 DPI or more when it is blown up full size on the t shirt.

I shot everything in L size. The specs for the Nikon D70 are:
Image Size (pixels): 3008 x 2000 [L], 2240 x 1448 [M], 1504 x 1000 [S] Image Sensor: RGB CCD, 23.7 x 15.6 mm; total pixels: 6.24 million Effective Pixels: 6.1 million
It would be 3008/200 on the long size and 2000/200 on the short side.
Who knows how to calculate? Just how big could I blow up a Large image if I took it to the 200 DPI limit?
15 inches on the long edge?

Here’s a bonus question. I also took pictures in 35mm.
If they are scanned at 4000 dpi, how big can I blow them up to stay within the 200 dpi limit? 20 inches?
Obtain the actual image size because a 35mm image is less than 1×1.5 inches, and then do the math.
Jim
Thanks a lot!

BH
Bill Hilton
Sep 12, 2006
wrote:

Here’s a bonus question. I also took pictures in 35mm.
If they are scanned at 4000 dpi, how big can I blow them up to stay within the 200 dpi limit? 20 inches?

35 mm is a bit less than 1×1.5" (24 x 36 mm for 35 mm film instead of 25.4 x 37.65 mm for 1×1.5") so you get a bit fewer than 6,000 x 4,000 pixels, especially with mounted slide film … with my 4,000 dpi scanner and slides I usually crop off a bit of the mount to get around 5,400 x 3,600 pixels just to make the numbers come out even for printing, so 200 ppi would give me 27 x 18" …
J
Jim
Sep 12, 2006
"Stan Beck" wrote in message
An image of 3008 x 2000 shot/saved at 300 dpi, will become roughly 10" x 15" if it is converted to 200 dpi, if done WITHOUT resampling of the image.

(I’m using Photoshop)

The simplest thing is to shoot at the max size and resolution, and give them the image from your camera – they know how to do all of that.
Just for information, if you take 3008 pixels and divide by 300 dpi, the result is 10.
Of course, but the OP asked about 200 dpi.
Jim

Honest technical and artistic critiques welcomed.

Stan Beck > From New Orleans to Brandon MS
To reply, remove 101 from address.
***

"Jim" wrote in message
wrote in message
Dear Experts,

Now that I’ve got my Nikon D70, and taken a few hundred pictures, I want to make a t shirt from one of the images.

The t shirt people have given me some specs. The image needs to be 200 DPI or more when it is blown up full size on the t shirt.

I shot everything in L size. The specs for the Nikon D70 are:
Image Size (pixels): 3008 x 2000 [L], 2240 x 1448 [M], 1504 x 1000 [S] Image Sensor: RGB CCD, 23.7 x 15.6 mm; total pixels: 6.24 million Effective Pixels: 6.1 million
It would be 3008/200 on the long size and 2000/200 on the short side.
Who knows how to calculate? Just how big could I blow up a Large image if I took it to the 200 DPI limit?
15 inches on the long edge?

Here’s a bonus question. I also took pictures in 35mm.
If they are scanned at 4000 dpi, how big can I blow them up to stay within the 200 dpi limit? 20 inches?
Obtain the actual image size because a 35mm image is less than 1×1.5 inches, and then do the math.
Jim
Thanks a lot!

GH
Gisle Hannemyr
Sep 12, 2006
writes:
The t shirt people have given me some specs. The image needs to be 200 DPI or more when it is blown up full size on the t shirt.

Take a look here to see what this means:
http://hannemyr.com/photo/pixels.html#qq17

Image Size (pixels): 3008 x 2000 [L]
Who knows how to calculate? Just how big could I blow up a Large image if I took it to the 200 DPI limit? 15 inches on the long edge?

Yes, that is right: 3008/200 = 15.04 inches.

Here’s a bonus question. I also took pictures in 35mm. If they are scanned at 4000 dpi, how big can I blow them up to stay within the 200 dpi limit? 20 inches?

35mm film is 1.42" wide x 4000 ~ 5600 px on the long side (provided you have scannet almost the entire negative) / 200 = 28 inches. —
– gisle hannemyr [ gisle{at}hannemyr.no – http://hannemyr.com/photo/ ] ———————————————————— ———— Sigma SD10, Kodak DCS460, Canon Powershot G5, Olympus 2020Z ———————————————————— ————
D
davidjl
Sep 12, 2006
"Gisle Hannemyr" <gisle+> wrote:

<Sensible stuff snipped>

Here’s a bonus question. I also took pictures in 35mm. If they are scanned at 4000 dpi, how big can I blow them up to stay within the 200 dpi limit? 20 inches?

35mm film is 1.42" wide x 4000 ~ 5600 px on the long side (provided you have scannet almost the entire negative) / 200 = 28 inches.

Here, there’s a problem. A 4000 ppi scan printed at 200 ppi is 20x enlargement, and film looks pretty hideous at 20x.

That is, a sharp digital camera image primted at 200 ppi looks way better than a 4000 ppi scan printed at 200 ppi, so this "200 ppi limit" fails to take into account the quality of the file being printed.

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan
BW
Bob Williams
Sep 12, 2006
wrote:
Dear Experts,

Now that I’ve got my Nikon D70, and taken a few hundred pictures, I want to make a t shirt from one of the images.

The t shirt people have given me some specs. The image needs to be 200 DPI or more when it is blown up full size on the t shirt.

I shot everything in L size. The specs for the Nikon D70 are:
Image Size (pixels): 3008 x 2000 [L], 2240 x 1448 [M], 1504 x 1000 [S] Image Sensor: RGB CCD, 23.7 x 15.6 mm; total pixels: 6.24 million Effective Pixels: 6.1 million

Who knows how to calculate? Just how big could I blow up a Large image if I took it to the 200 DPI limit?
15 inches on the long edge?

Here’s a bonus question. I also took pictures in 35mm.
If they are scanned at 4000 dpi, how big can I blow them up to stay within the 200 dpi limit? 20 inches?

Thanks a lot!

First decide how large you WANT the picture to be and still look good on a T-shirt. 15×10 is really large unless you wear an XXL size. IMHO, much larger than that would look strange.
15" X 10" times 200 pixels/inch = 3000 x 2000 pixels, exactly what your camera captured. But don’t feel constrained by the 200 ppi requirement. Ask the vendor what is the OPTIMUM ppm that his printer can use. Printers have a native resolution.
If you send them something less than optimum, they up-rez it. If you send something more than optimum, they down-rez it. If the printer’s optimum resolution is say, 300 ppi, I would not hesitate to let Photoshop resize your image to 300 ppi and end up with a 4500 x 3000 pixel image. Then tell the printer you want the image to be printed at 15 x 10 inches.
Remember, you are not printing on Glossy Photo Paper, you are printing on an extremely coarse substrate, (by photo printing standards). A 6 MP image from a quality camera like the D70, resized to 4500 x 3000 pixels would scarcely show any up-rezing artifacts even on Glossy Photo Paper and certainly none at all on T-Shirt material.
Bob Williams
SB
Stan Beck
Sep 12, 2006
You have to consider that this will be printed on a tee-shirt – you loose a lot of resolution there alone.


Honest technical and artistic critiques welcomed.

Stan Beck > From New Orleans to Brandon MS
To reply, remove 101 from address.
***

"David J. Littleboy" wrote in message
"Gisle Hannemyr" <gisle+> wrote:

<Sensible stuff snipped>

Here’s a bonus question. I also took pictures in 35mm. If they are scanned at 4000 dpi, how big can I blow them up to stay within the 200 dpi limit? 20 inches?

35mm film is 1.42" wide x 4000 ~ 5600 px on the long side (provided you have scannet almost the entire negative) / 200 = 28 inches.

Here, there’s a problem. A 4000 ppi scan printed at 200 ppi is 20x enlargement, and film looks pretty hideous at 20x.

That is, a sharp digital camera image primted at 200 ppi looks way better than a 4000 ppi scan printed at 200 ppi, so this "200 ppi limit" fails to take into account the quality of the file being printed.
David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan

D
davidjl
Sep 12, 2006
"Stan Beck" wrote:

You have to consider that this will be printed on a tee-shirt – you loose a lot of resolution there alone.

Really! Ouch: I responded to a mid-thread note without reading the original question; even 35mm is way overkill for t shirts. Thanks for the reality check.

The OP should decide the size, aspect ratio, and composition (cropping) without worrying about pixels, and then do a simple resize (using bicubic interpolation or the like) to the pixel dimensions the company that’s going to print the t-shirt asks for/recommends.

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan
JM
John McWilliams
Sep 12, 2006
David J. Littleboy wrote:
"Stan Beck" wrote:

You have to consider that this will be printed on a tee-shirt – you loose a lot of resolution there alone.

Really! Ouch: I responded to a mid-thread note without reading the original question; even 35mm is way overkill for t shirts. Thanks for the reality check.

The OP should decide the size, aspect ratio, and composition (cropping) without worrying about pixels, and then do a simple resize (using bicubic interpolation or the like) to the pixel dimensions the company that’s going to print the t-shirt asks for/recommends.

Or bother to respond to any of this, esp. as it’s x-posted around the sand lot.In any event, once again DPI is confused with PPI, although here to no apparent detriment, at least among the many responders.

OP- any 10-4 on any of this?


john mcwilliams
M
Marvin
Sep 12, 2006
Jim wrote:
wrote in message

Dear Experts,

Now that I’ve got my Nikon D70, and taken a few hundred pictures, I want to make a t shirt from one of the images.

The t shirt people have given me some specs. The image needs to be 200 DPI or more when it is blown up full size on the t shirt.

I shot everything in L size. The specs for the Nikon D70 are:
Image Size (pixels): 3008 x 2000 [L], 2240 x 1448 [M], 1504 x 1000 [S] Image Sensor: RGB CCD, 23.7 x 15.6 mm; total pixels: 6.24 million Effective Pixels: 6.1 million

It would be 3008/200 on the long size and 2000/200 on the short side.
Who knows how to calculate? Just how big could I blow up a Large image if I took it to the 200 DPI limit?
15 inches on the long edge?

Here’s a bonus question. I also took pictures in 35mm.
If they are scanned at 4000 dpi, how big can I blow them up to stay within the 200 dpi limit? 20 inches?

Obtain the actual image size because a 35mm image is less than 1×1.5 inches, and then do the math.
Jim

Thanks a lot!

They can’t possibly print on a T-shirt at a resolution that requires 200 ppi. You can either argue with them, or use an image editor to increase the number of pixels. At least they don’t ask for 300 ppi, as many printers do when they aren’t printing on paper that can’t support that high a resolution.
SB
Stan Beck
Sep 12, 2006
Actually, you always do your comp work at a resolution higher than the final output, especially when the final output will be printed using separations and screening – in these cases, you need a dpi resolution at least twice what the screen will be.


Honest technical and artistic critiques welcomed.

Stan Beck > From New Orleans to Brandon MS
To reply, remove 101 from address.
***

"Marvin" wrote in message
Jim wrote:
wrote in message

Dear Experts,

Now that I’ve got my Nikon D70, and taken a few hundred pictures, I want to make a t shirt from one of the images.
. . .

They can’t possibly print on a T-shirt at a resolution that requires 200 ppi. You can either argue with them, or use an image editor to increase the number of pixels. At least they don’t ask for 300 ppi, as many printers do when they aren’t printing on paper that can’t support that high a resolution.
M
Marvin
Sep 13, 2006
Stan Beck wrote:
Actually, you always do your comp work at a resolution higher than the final output, especially when the final output will be printed using separations and screening – in these cases, you need a dpi resolution at least twice what the screen will be.

Please explain why it is necessary to exceed the resolution of the screen by that much.
AM
Andrew Morton
Sep 13, 2006
Marvin wrote:
Stan Beck wrote:
Actually, you always do your comp work at a resolution higher than the final output, especially when the final output will be printed using separations and screening – in these cases, you need a dpi resolution at least twice what the screen will be.

Please explain why it is necessary to exceed the resolution of the screen by that much.

I’m guessing this applies:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyqvist-Shannon_sampling_theore m

Andrew
DC
Dave Cohen
Sep 13, 2006
wrote:
Dear Experts,

Now that I’ve got my Nikon D70, and taken a few hundred pictures, I want to make a t shirt from one of the images.

The t shirt people have given me some specs. The image needs to be 200 DPI or more when it is blown up full size on the t shirt.

I shot everything in L size. The specs for the Nikon D70 are:
Image Size (pixels): 3008 x 2000 [L], 2240 x 1448 [M], 1504 x 1000 [S] Image Sensor: RGB CCD, 23.7 x 15.6 mm; total pixels: 6.24 million Effective Pixels: 6.1 million

Who knows how to calculate? Just how big could I blow up a Large image if I took it to the 200 DPI limit?
15 inches on the long edge?

Here’s a bonus question. I also took pictures in 35mm.
If they are scanned at 4000 dpi, how big can I blow them up to stay within the 200 dpi limit? 20 inches?

Thanks a lot!
The way I take it, they are defining a minimum resolution. Just give them the way you shoot it, they will do the rest.
Dave Cohen
SB
Stan Beck
Sep 13, 2006
In short, the screen (part of the color separation process) is a bunch of dots or holes that has to be able to distinguish between black, white, or half-tones. The half tones is the trick – unless the "hole" can pick up part of the transition between black or white, it will render either black or white, not the half tone. Color is more complicated, because you are working in a four color process (CYMK) most of the time, although sometimes it is printed in three colors – Yellow, magenta and cyan. The color screen produces tear-shaped dots that are all rotated at an angle from each other.

That’s not a great explanation, but reading about color separation, screening and four color printing is a very interesting and informative topic. You should look into it, for no other reason than to know the difference between color pre-press and desktop ink jet printing.

In today’s commercial digital ink jet printing, the dpi has to be high enough to give nearly 100% coverage, based upon the size of the ink droplets, which vary from one brand/model printer to another.


Honest technical and artistic critiques welcomed.

Stan Beck > From New Orleans to Brandon MS
To reply, remove 101 from address.
***

"Marvin" wrote in message
Stan Beck wrote:
Actually, you always do your comp work at a resolution higher than the final output, especially when the final output will be printed using separations and screening – in these cases, you need a dpi resolution at least twice what the screen will be.

Please explain why it is necessary to exceed the resolution of the screen by that much.
T
Tacit
Sep 15, 2006
In article ,
Marvin wrote:

Please explain why it is necessary to exceed the resolution of the screen by that much.

This is standard in the prepress industry. When you print an image using a certain halftone, the optimal resolution of the image is twice the halftone frequency. If you print an image with a 150 line halftone, the image should be 300 pixels per inch for best results. If you print with a 175-line halftone, the image should be 350 pixels per inch.

The reason is complicated, and applies to things other than just pictures. It has to do with any sort of data quantization. Mathematically speaking, if you sample your data at twice the maximum quantization rate, you’ll get the best possible results. Without going into why it works that way, which is pretty heavy signal processing theory and beyond the scope of a newsgroup message here, if you are sampling sound and you want to reproduce tones up to 22kHz, you sample at 44kHz; if you are quantizing an image, you sample the image at double the quantization value; and so on.


Art, photography, shareware, polyamory, literature, kink: all at http://www.xeromag.com/franklin.html
Nanohazard, Geek shirts, and more: http://www.villaintees.com
D
davidjl
Sep 15, 2006
"tacit" wrote:
Marvin wrote:

Please explain why it is necessary to exceed the resolution of the screen by that much.

This is standard in the prepress industry. When you print an image using a certain halftone, the optimal resolution of the image is twice the halftone frequency. If you print an image with a 150 line halftone, the image should be 300 pixels per inch for best results. If you print with a 175-line halftone, the image should be 350 pixels per inch.
The reason is complicated, and applies to things other than just pictures. It has to do with any sort of data quantization. Mathematically speaking, if you sample your data at twice the maximum quantization rate, you’ll get the best possible results. Without going into why it works that way, which is pretty heavy signal processing theory and beyond the scope of a newsgroup message here, if you are sampling sound and you want to reproduce tones up to 22kHz, you sample at 44kHz; if you are quantizing an image, you sample the image at double the quantization value; and so on.

That’s equivalent to the claim that one halftone line can represent one whole cycle of a sinusoid. Is that what you meant to say?

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan
T
Talker
Sep 24, 2006
On 11 Sep 2006 15:11:06 -0700, wrote:

Dear Experts,

Now that I’ve got my Nikon D70, and taken a few hundred pictures, I want to make a t shirt from one of the images.

The t shirt people have given me some specs. The image needs to be 200 DPI or more when it is blown up full size on the t shirt.

I shot everything in L size. The specs for the Nikon D70 are:
Image Size (pixels): 3008 x 2000 [L], 2240 x 1448 [M], 1504 x 1000 [S] Image Sensor: RGB CCD, 23.7 x 15.6 mm; total pixels: 6.24 million Effective Pixels: 6.1 million

Who knows how to calculate? Just how big could I blow up a Large image if I took it to the 200 DPI limit?
15 inches on the long edge?

Here’s a bonus question. I also took pictures in 35mm.
If they are scanned at 4000 dpi, how big can I blow them up to stay within the 200 dpi limit? 20 inches?

Thanks a lot!

If you’re using PhotoShop, just open the image in PhotoShop, then click on "Image"……"Image Size". Uncheck the "Resample" box, and in the dpi box, enter in 200. This will adjust the actual size, so that you end up with a 200 dpi picture, at a size that corresponds to your 3008 x 2000.

Talker
N
neil
Oct 4, 2006
In article ,
wrote:

Dear Experts,
(stuff deleted)
Image Size (pixels): 3008 x 2000 [L], 2240 x 1448 [M], 1504 x 1000 [S] Image Sensor: RGB CCD, 23.7 x 15.6 mm; total pixels: 6.24 million Effective Pixels: 6.1 million

You may have already figured it out but – 3000 pixels divided by 200 dpi equals 15 inches. Yes, it is that easy.

Who knows how to calculate? Just how big could I blow up a Large image if I took it to the 200 DPI limit?
15 inches on the long edge?

Here’s a bonus question. I also took pictures in 35mm.
If they are scanned at 4000 dpi, how big can I blow them up to stay within the 200 dpi limit? 20 inches?

Yes, you are right. See, not so hard.

MacBook Pro 16” Mockups 🔥

– in 4 materials (clay versions included)

– 12 scenes

– 48 MacBook Pro 16″ mockups

– 6000 x 4500 px

Related Discussion Topics

Nice and short text about related topics in discussion sections