digital print quality

[StreetShark]

If I print a 5x7 of a 800x600 image what kind of quality should I expect? Horrible, ok or great?

 

[Big Mike]

I wouldn't count on it being too great. The usual standard is 300 pixels per inch of print. So you would want an image that is 1500x2100.

 

[Dubious Drewski]

Depending on who prints it and what software they use - probably pretty bad. I printed some 800x600 4x6s at work(I work at a photolab) and they look very pixellated. But you can fake some resolution by first up-scaling the image with a good algorithm, like the one photoshop uses. Rescale by 200%-300% and the worst that will happen is you'll have a slightly blurry print - which is much better than a pixellated print.

Print both sizes and see for yourself!

 

[Helen B]

Out of curiosity I tried printing a set of the photos I have on Photobucket - QOOP offers the service. They were 532x800 low compression JPGs (Photoshop quality 11 or 12 out of 12, ie around 300 to 400 kB) printed to 4x6. The printer was probably printing at 300 ppi.

Their upsampling software did a better job than I expected, and the images were marginally OK-ish. They did not look particularly pixellated (they weren't obviously blocky, and there were no jagged lines) or blurred (edges still looked like edges), just low definition. That's to say that they looked like typical overenlarged digital images. Nowhere near the quality of a true 300 ppi print though. I wouldn't want to pass them round as an example of my work. I showed them to other people (real people, not photographers) and they were happy with the quality.

Best,
Helen

 

[Sun Devil Rob]

I wouldn't count on it being too great. The usual standard is 300 pixels per inch of print. So you would want an image that is 1500x2100.

I agree with Mike that anything less than 300 ppi is asking for trouble.

 

[EOS_JD]

That's why many of the images on the web and low res Cds issued by some wedding photographers are issued at resolutions of 800x600 or smaller.....

Mainly to stop people printing the images at any reasonable quality.

I would add that you'd probably not notice any difference in a 240ppi image to a 300ppi image so you can usually get away with something like that.

Also a 7x5 image of an 800 x 600 iumage is not really possible as the ratio is different. You would need to crop some of the image to get the right ratio - 800 x 571 is nearer the mark and would result in a print at 114ppi - way too low for a good quality print.

 

[StreetShark]

haha damn thats what expected because I have a few nice images that I would like to print .I took them last year when I knew very little about photography and I down-sized them to web size and deleted the originals.

 

[chris_arnet]

I agree with Mike that anything less than 300 ppi is asking for trouble.

i have to disagree. I think 200ppi is fine. I dont go any lower, but i think its all good down to around there.

 

[EOS_JD]

haha damn thats what expected because I have a few nice images that I would like to print .I took them last year when I knew very little about photography and I down-sized them to web size and deleted the originals.

NEVER EVER EVER DELETE YOUR ORIGNALS!!!!

 

[EOS_JD]

i have to disagree. I think 200ppi is fine. I dont go any lower, but i think its all good down to around there.

200ppi is getting on the low side particularly for a 6x4 but yes you should still get acceptable results.

For large prints though you can print at even lower resolutions and get great results.

 

[RKW3]

StreetShark, I guarantee with a program like Genuine Fractals you can upsize that 800 pixel image until it's good enough for a 5x7 with nice results. I tried the demo of Genuine Fractals and it's scary good.

 

[EOS_JD]

StreetShark, I guarantee with a program like Genuine Fractals you can upsize that 800 pixel image until it's good enough for a 5x7 with nice results. I tried the demo of Genuine Fractals and it's scary good.

maybe my web images will now be smaller than 800 pixels!!