Hi res images

"leon" wrote in news::

Please explain me how to make hi res images of 300 dpi and file size of 50 -100mb.

Buy a good medium format camera, learn how to use it. Shoot with fine-grain film, say ISO 100 or better, then pay for processing and scanning.

You might be able to get buy with as little as $8,000 USD investment. How much time it takes to get good images depends on your ability.

Cheapest image I find be over$ 200.00

Yep. Photographers like to be paid.

What are my options?

Pay them, ask them to donate at a lower price or free, or shoot it yourself.

I need those images to make poster of 22×80 inch.

You’ll need images larger than 100 meg if you are determined to use 300 dpi. That size with full bleed is well over 600 MB.

However, it’s usually possible to use lower resolution with something that large as people will be viewing it from a distance. You might try outputting a test strip to see how it looks from the distance you think people will be viewing it from.

22×80 at 300dpi would require an image using a dimension of 6600×24000 pixels.

Those are really, really large images and you might find that printing a poster only requires a res of 150dpi at most to keep quality reasonable. In that case drop the pixel sizes by 50%. If your after source photos you could get 35mm film scanned using a professional scanner but it might not be fantastic quality, certianly not 300dpi.

The image file size at these resoloutions should not be a concern to you, as your asking for a high spec to begin with. You could either compress the image as a JPEG to make some savings or drop the dpi, Id prefer the former .

Cheers,
Tom

"leon" wrote in message

Please explain me how to make hi res images of 300 dpi and file size of 50 -100mb.
Cheapest image I find be over$ 200.00
What are my options? I need those images to make poster of 22×80 inch. Thanks

On Wed, 22 Oct 2003 20:12:05 +0100, "Tom" scribbled:

If your after source photos you
could get 35mm film scanned using a professional scanner but it might not be fantastic quality, certianly not 300dpi.

A ‘professional’ scanner that won’t produce 300DPI images?

"leon" wrote in message

Please explain me how to make hi res images of 300 dpi and file size of 50 -100mb.

Of what?

Cheapest image I find be over$ 200.00
What are my options? I need those images to make poster of 22×80 inch.

http://www.caldwellphotographic.com/MosaicTutorial.html

In message , Eric Gill
writes

"leon" wrote in news::

Please explain me how to make hi res images of 300 dpi and file size of 50 -100mb.

Buy a good medium format camera, learn how to use it. Shoot with fine-grain film, say ISO 100 or better, then pay for processing and scanning.
You might be able to get buy with as little as $8,000 USD investment. How much time it takes to get good images depends on your ability.

Cheapest image I find be over$ 200.00

Yep. Photographers like to be paid.

What are my options?

Pay them, ask them to donate at a lower price or free, or shoot it yourself.

I need those images to make poster of 22×80 inch.

You’ll need images larger than 100 meg if you are determined to use 300 dpi. That size with full bleed is well over 600 MB.

However, it’s usually possible to use lower resolution with something that large as people will be viewing it from a distance. You might try outputting a test strip to see how it looks from the distance you think people will be viewing it from.

I am only an Elements 1 user, but I would have thought that posterised images have a much smaller footprint (i.e. file size) than a photo quality one, and require lower resolution because the edges are sharp and not feathered with subtle trnasitions.

Or did the original poster (pun intended) just mean "big print"?

Mike
[The reply-to address is valid for 30 days from this posting] —
Michael J Davis
http://www.trustsof.demon.co.uk
<><
For this is what the Lord has said to me,
"Go and post a Watchman and let
him report what he sees." Isa 21:6
<><

Michael J Davis wrote in news:PvgO2ZC2s4p
$:

I am only an Elements 1 user, but I would have thought that posterised images have a much smaller footprint (i.e. file size) than a photo quality one, and require lower resolution because the edges are sharp and not feathered with subtle trnasitions.

The "posterized" filter has little to do with actual posters except as an imitation of a certain genre.

Or did the original poster (pun intended) just mean "big print"?

Yes, I gather that from his message.

In message , Eric Gill
writes

Michael J Davis wrote in news:PvgO2ZC2s4p
$:

I am only an Elements 1 user, but I would have thought that posterised images have a much smaller footprint (i.e. file size) than a photo quality one, and require lower resolution because the edges are sharp and not feathered with subtle trnasitions.

The "posterized" filter has little to do with actual posters except as an imitation of a certain genre.

Thanks Eric, I was thinking *beyond* the effect, into colour separations, but I did wonder.

Or did the original poster (pun intended) just mean "big print"?

Yes, I gather that from his message.

I guess so.

Mike

PS. Forgive me, but your post has reminded me of the name I spent the weekend trying to remember, that of a wonderful artist and sculptor! You aren’t related to him are you?
[The reply-to address is valid for 30 days from this posting] —
Michael J Davis
http://www.trustsof.demon.co.uk
<><
For this is what the Lord has said to me,
"Go and post a Watchman and let
him report what he sees." Isa 21:6
<><

Michael J Davis wrote in news:k4U0zQEnl+p
$:

PS. Forgive me, but your post has reminded me of the name I spent the weekend trying to remember, that of a wonderful artist and sculptor! You aren’t related to him are you?

No, a fan of his work (I’m a type geek), though not of his lifestyle, religion or philosophy. This is a nom for the ‘net.

On Tue, 04 Nov 2003 20:35:03 GMT, Eric Gill
wrote:

Michael J Davis wrote in news:k4U0zQEnl+p
$:

PS. Forgive me, but your post has reminded me of the name I spent the weekend trying to remember, that of a wonderful artist and sculptor! You aren’t related to him are you?

No, a fan of his work (I’m a type geek), though not of his lifestyle, religion or philosophy. This is a nom for the ‘net.

And there I was thinking you were a reincarnation… 😉

—

Hecate

veni, vidi, relinqui

Hecate wrote in
news::

On Tue, 04 Nov 2003 20:35:03 GMT, Eric Gill
wrote:

Michael J Davis wrote in news:k4U0zQEnl+p
$:

PS. Forgive me, but your post has reminded me of the name I spent the weekend trying to remember, that of a wonderful artist and sculptor! You aren’t related to him are you?

No, a fan of his work (I’m a type geek), though not of his lifestyle, religion or philosophy. This is a nom for the ‘net.

And there I was thinking you were a reincarnation… 😉

If I had gotten his talent without his distasteful personal habits, I could have lived with that. ;-}

But, no, I’m maybe good enough to have done his scut-work and hodcarrying, then swept the studio up afterwards. Talent that remarkable is a precious accident in history.

In message , Eric Gill
writes

Michael J Davis wrote in news:k4U0zQEnl+p
$:

PS. Forgive me, but your post has reminded me of the name I spent the weekend trying to remember, that of a wonderful artist and sculptor! You aren’t related to him are you?

No, a fan of his work (I’m a type geek), though not of his lifestyle, religion or philosophy. This is a nom for the ‘net.

Ta! Thanks for the reminder. All types welcome!!! 😉

Mike
[The reply-to address is valid for 30 days from this posting] —
Michael J Davis
http://www.trustsof.demon.co.uk
<><
For this is what the Lord has said to me,
"Go and post a Watchman and let
him report what he sees." Isa 21:6
<><

On Wed, 05 Nov 2003 02:45:20 GMT, Eric Gill
wrote:

Hecate wrote in
news::

On Tue, 04 Nov 2003 20:35:03 GMT, Eric Gill
wrote:

Michael J Davis wrote in news:k4U0zQEnl+p
$:

PS. Forgive me, but your post has reminded me of the name I spent the weekend trying to remember, that of a wonderful artist and sculptor! You aren’t related to him are you?

No, a fan of his work (I’m a type geek), though not of his lifestyle, religion or philosophy. This is a nom for the ‘net.

And there I was thinking you were a reincarnation… 😉

If I had gotten his talent without his distasteful personal habits, I could have lived with that. ;-}

LOL!

But, no, I’m maybe good enough to have done his scut-work and hodcarrying, then swept the studio up afterwards. Talent that remarkable is a precious accident in history.

Yes, it is.Like you say, shame about the rest. But, I think it’s true that the most talented are often the most flawed. So there’s hope for me yet 🙂

—

Hecate

veni, vidi, relinqui

A frame from a 35mm camera is 24x36mm. You would have to scan it at 16933.333dpi to be able to enlarge it to 22×80 inches at 300dpi.

Bruce

Voivod wrote:

On Wed, 22 Oct 2003 20:12:05 +0100, "Tom" scribbled:

If your after source photos you
could get 35mm film scanned using a professional scanner but it might not be fantastic quality, certianly not 300dpi.

A ‘professional’ scanner that won’t produce 300DPI images?