Who makes gigantic prints?

[Ilovemycam]

Saw some pictures of photos in a museum's gallery. The prints were color and maybe 8 to 10 feet tall? Maybe bigger??

Whatever the size, they were gigantic.

Who makes FA prints that big? I guess they are inkjet? What do they cost to get museum quality prints that big?

When blowing up an image that big do they use software to increase the quality? The giant pix were not shot with a view cam from what I could see.

 

[KmH]

Lots of places. Most of them are online too.

If what you saw was 8 to 10 feet tall, how wide was it? The shorter side is the limiting factor, because paper can be acquired on rolls and the length of the roll (the long side (100 feet or more)) is usually way longer than the short side, the maximum width capacity of the print machine.

.... high-resolution printers perform flawlessly on roll media in sizes up to 126" wide, and on flat substrate up to 126".

 

[jamesdak]

Well I obviously cannot speak to the images you saw but I will sometimes stitch 20 or so Canon 5D images together into on huge image. Have yet to source a print company for them but the images are quite large. I home I print 13" x 60"/70" panoramas quite often. I do use Qimage sometime to uprez stuff but with planned shooting in the field and then modest pp'ing you can create so awesome and large shots. I will sometimes take a lanscape shot that could be easily covered with say a 25 or 35 mm lens and shoot it instead with a 180 or 200 mm lens. Then I stitch the images together to get one huge, highly detailed image. Maybe what you are seeing is something like that...

 

[jwbryson1]

A guy with a gigantic printer.

 

[Ilovemycam]

Very wide, small ones were maybe 5 feet wide?

Bigguns were wider.

These are small ones

http://face2face.si.edu/.a/6a00e550199efb8833010536c13ddc970c-800wi

http://images.artnet.com/images_US/magazine/news/corbett/cindy-sherman-at-moma-2.jpg

These are big ones

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m29ho0Uxfu1r0zjlqo1_500.jpg

 

[table1349]

Let me google that for you

 

[bratkinson]

Before the digital age, mural-size prints were always the product of someone with an 8"x10" (that's inches!) frame, or even larger camera. They also had the technical expertise and experience to use that equipment effectively.

For what it's worth, 8-9 years ago, one of my photo-hobbiest friends rented an 8x10 camera and we were out doing a winter time night shoot. He had very carefully metered the shot, then did the appropriate math and determined his exposures to be 30 MINUTES for some and only 28 for a couple of brighter-lit ones. Me and my then higher-end point and shoot of the day was shooting at 3-5 second exposures and I was very satisfied with the results (I was easy to please, back then). That is, until I saw what that camera produced! Jaw-dropping, to say the least.

Obviously, stitching together a fair number of panoramic shots these days is THE way to go!

 

[Helen B]

The pictures have a few vague clues in them that suggest that these may be pictures by Cindy Sherman. It is, therefore, easy to find out sizes and print types. One way would be to go to the MoMA site and look at the exhibition pages

link