TV preview vs Printing

[asfixiate]

I plugged the TV cable into my camera and into my tv to start reviewing pictures. Even though the colors weren't exactly spot on(could have adjusted) it was filling up the entire screen with minimal appearance issues. What's the difference between what my screen was displaying and how large I can print something.

I understand its probably a magnification but still it didn't look that horrible.

If I confused anyone I'm not surprised but I'd be glad to clear anything up.

 

[Atropine]

The only things deciding how large prints you can do is the actual pixel dimensions and the technical quality of the photo. Using a TV as some kind of proofing seems like a really bad idea since it probably distorts colours and contrast far more than you can imagine.

 

[asfixiate]

Thanks. I didn't mess around with the color settings at all on the TV. I was just using the TV temporarily to check for focusing issues as well as layout. If it looked as "clear" as it did I felt it could possibly get similar results if printed that size. obviously the colors would be better.

Focusing and composition was the reason I viewed on TV. On the HDTV if I got it to be a clear crisp image would it print that clear was just curiousity.

 

[ksm]

Just because a TV might show a photo pretty descently as far as enlarging it, it doesn't mean it will print well. TVs use an upscaling feature to convert an image (using some algorithm) to a larger (or smaller) size and make it look good. That's how you can get a regular DVD to show in 1080i for example, through the TVs or DVD player's upscale feature.

 

[ksm]

You can use photoshop or even better OnOne's Fractionals to achive an enlargement of a lower quality photograph with descent results

 

[asfixiate]

Thanks KSM.

 

[ksm]

Glad I can help

 

[andrew99]

HD TV's have a resolution of 1920×1080, which is probably about half the resolution of your photos (and a different aspect ratio). I think a printed image of the same physical size as the TV would have more pixels, and should therefor look better than the TV. It would be interesting to compare, though!

 

[asfixiate]

Thanks.

I think i'm losing my mind and was confused wtih something else. Thanks everyone.

 

[One Sister]

You can use photoshop or even better OnOne's Fractionals to achive an enlargement of a lower quality photograph with descent results

I'm glad you brought Genuine Fractals up. I've been playing with the bundled plug-in for a while and although I like the other bundled software, I have not noticed an appreciable difference with Genuine Fractals 5.0. Have you used it? Is there a trick? It seems to be pretty straight forward, however, so I don't know what I could be doing wrong. Without it I have made tack sharp color consistent enlargements up to 24x36. I would have figured I could use the plug-in to go bigger and I just don't see it.

 

[Garbz]

You are missing a key point in this discussion. How many people stare at their TV from 30cm away. Even without up-scaling (i.e. my plasma does not upscale the 1080p signal but it still looks good fullscreen at 46") images look great on TV.

If you want to print a picture that's 46" across feel free to do it, but then sit down and appreciate it from the other side of the room. Don't go and stick your nose in it or you may find the quality somewhat lacking. And not even Genuine Fractals will fix that.

Genuine Fractals is great for contrasty scenes with lots of lines and fine textures, but for images with gradients I prefer to use a Sinc Function (sin(x)/x for the maths geeks here) based windowing filter. Something like the Lanczos resampler available in many applications (but not bloody photoshop *stab*)