Tools for big prints

[MacroByMarit]

Dear all, 

I have an outdoor exposition coming up, for which 20 of my photos (bug portraits) will be printed on 1,3m x 1,3m boards (51x51 inch). Is there any option in Affinity Photo to upscale, to add pixels (as in: a higher ppi)? The photos are originally 6240 x 4160, but since the prints will be square, they will be cropped. Do I need something like Topaz Gigapixel, or is there a tool in Affinity Photo that can do something similar? 

Cheers! 

Edited April 4, 2021 by MacroByMarit
Suggestion by @garryP

[GarryP]

Welcome to the forums @MacroByMarit
It might be useful for people who want to answer your query if you explain what you mean by “add pixels” and “come out nicely”.
These things can be interpreted differently by different people.

[MacroByMarit]

7 minutes ago, GarryP said:

Welcome to the forums @MacroByMarit
It might be useful for people who want to answer your query if you explain what you mean by “add pixels” and “come out nicely”.
These things can be interpreted differently by different people.

I hope my question is more clear now!

 

[GarryP]

Thanks, I’m sure that will help the experts to give you some answers.
In the meantime, while you are waiting, as far as I know, there are various different ways to ‘upscale’ a pixel image in Photo – e.g. resampling via Document → Resize Document – but if you expect the software to be able to ‘intelligently guess’ any missing details then you might be out of luck.
Have a look at some of the resampling options and see what you can get, as that might be good enough for what you want. (I’ve never printed something that large so I don’t know what problems are inherent to that process.)

[Wosven]

Hi @MacroByMarit 

The best thing you can do is to ask the printer which specifications he wants exactly. Depending of his answers, you'll know how to do your files.

For example, we printed pictures on tarpaulin ("bâches" in French*), when we needed to do some expositions, and he only wanted 200PPP PDF from us. It's completely different from what we use for printing on paper.

If you want to use an online service, they'll give specifications too about the required files and minimum PPP needed.

 

* I  can't remember exactly, but they were at least ± 3 × 2 m.

[MacroByMarit]

@GarryP Thank you, I will be looking into that simple resizing. Might be OK for some of them. 

@Wosven I asked before and they were OK with any type of file. Everything was 'no problem'. But a minimum PPP (is that the same as PPI?) will be nice for me to know, so at least I have some kind of framework. I'm just worried that it will seem... 'blocky' if that makes sense. I've never done prints this size before. I will ask them specifically about the material as well. 

[Wosven]

6 minutes ago, MacroByMarit said:

(is that the same as PPI?)

Yes, I forget to translate

And I understand you, getting the right colours, and right tones for pictures or painting is important. Such a vague answer doesn't seem to help, but perhaps it's just us, and we shouldn't worry if they're used to do this.

[MacroByMarit]

@Wosven Yes I want it to be a colourful experience for the visitors. And their opinion of 'good' might not be the same as mine. We are our own worst critics, right? 

In making your 200PPI images, did you use any tools to upscale though? 

[Wosven]

No, it wasn't needed.
Usually, if the images are good quality, we don't mind using them at 120% (maximum) if needed for print (or using them at 280PPI instead of 300).

I don't know how much time you've got, perhaps you can send one file and check the result with them, and adjust the settings if it's needed for the other ones. Or do a sample of a detail on a smaller paper/tarpaulin, to check it first.

 

(The Agency's boss I worked with was able to go and check the 1st one, before I send the other, but they used to work like this.)

[Alfred]

45 minutes ago, Wosven said:

For example, we printed pictures on tarpaulin ("bâches" in French*), when we needed to do some expositions, and he only wanted 200PPP PDF from us.

A picture which is 3 by 2 metres when printed at 200 PPI will still be ‘retina’ (i.e. you won’t be able to distinguish individual pixels) if viewed from a distance of only 50 cm.

[MacroByMarit]

I have got plenty of time, fortunately. Expo will be in July. I already made most of the photos I will use, but I plan to look for specific species this month and in May. I can always call and ask... For me at least it would be nice to just have a checklist, or some standard size/ppi that would be... 'acceptable' for this size prints. Thank you for your answers! 

[Wosven]

2 minutes ago, Alfred said:

A picture which is 3 by 2 metres when printed at 200 PPI will still be ‘retina’ (i.e. you won’t be able to distinguish individual pixels) if viewed from a distance of only 50 cm.

Yes, the result was very nice, it was people in traditional and colorfull clothes in a procession, in colourfull surrounding too.

[MacroByMarit]

4 minutes ago, Alfred said:

A picture which is 3 by 2 metres when printed at 200 PPI will still be ‘retina’ (i.e. you won’t be able to distinguish individual pixels) if viewed from a distance of only 50 cm.

The expo will be outside.. and it will be viewed from like a meter at least. So what would you say is a good basic PPI to go for? 

[Alfred]

12 minutes ago, MacroByMarit said:

The expo will be outside.. and it will be viewed from like a meter at least. So what would you say is a good basic PPI to go for? 

You could probably get away with 100 PPI or less, but you certainly don’t need more than 150 PPI.

[MikeW]

At a nominal viewing distance of 5 feet (1.5 meters), a person with 20/20 vision needs a min. of 115 ppi of native resolution for an image to appear equal to a 300 dpi image in magazine. (Better distance viewing becomes moot above ~150 ppi.)

For an image printed 41" x 41" as a full background, the min. pixel dimension required to meet 115 ppi is 5842 pixels at a nominal viewing distance of 5 feet.

[MacroByMarit]

5 minutes ago, MikeW said:

At a nominal viewing distance of 5 feet (1.5 meters), a person with 20/20 vision needs a min. of 115 ppi of native resolution for an image to appear equal to a 300 dpi image in magazine. (Better distance viewing becomes moot above ~150 ppi.)

For an image printed 41" x 41" as a full background, the min. pixel dimension required to meet 115 ppi is 5842 pixels at a nominal viewing distance of 5 feet.

Thanks so much, Mike. This is incredibly helpful! I'm just gonna go with 6000x6000 pixels to be on the safe side. 

Is there any tool in Affinity that can upscale in a 'smart' way? Or is Gigapixel the way to go... 

[MikeW]

You are most welcome. 

Affinity applications have standard resizing methods. I would try the various ways in Affinity applications first. You don't need much to hit your target. You may find one of them acceptable. 

[v_kyr]

2 hours ago, MacroByMarit said:

I'm just gonna go with 6000x6000 pixels to be on the safe side. 

You can check/verify with some printing calculators (...use the first/top one calculator with settings 51" x 51" at 150 ppi  to crosscheck) here.

[MacroByMarit]

1 hour ago, v_kyr said:

You can check/verify with some printing calculators (...use the first/top one calculator with settings 51" x 51" at 150 ppi  to crosscheck) here.

That's a handy tool, thanks

[lacerto]

(...)

[MacroByMarit]

3 minutes ago, Lagarto said:

Considering the amount ot pixels you have in your original images, and the need for enlargement (less than 200%)  there is probably not much benefit from using Gigalpixel AI comparied to using standard APhoto algorithms (possibly adding some sharperning afterwards). It can do wonders when the source has less detail and there is need for a bigger enlargement (but it can also ruin an image by guessing too much). 

I tried both methods and found that Gigapixel gave me a more satisfying result than APhoto to be honest. But you do have a fair point that it can 'guess' too much... Here is the Gigapixel one:

And the AF one: 

Most of the cropped images are >3000pixels, but not all of them. Gigapixel is quite a hassle, so if I can avoid it by just enlarging through Aphoto, that would be great. What would you suggest? 

[lacerto]

(,,,)

[MacroByMarit]

@Lagarto The distance might even be bigger... but I think 1,5m is a safe assumption. Yes, the process takes a while but if its all the same for all the 20 photos, I can just leave it running one night, that would be OK. If the result is better than in Affinity, that is. But I'm doubting... 

And I went with 6000x6000 but ppi 150 would be more like 7500x7500 according to the calculators @v_kyrand @MikeW send. 

[MacroByMarit]

Hey all, thought to give you an update of how the expo finally turned out and what I ended up using. People with a similar question might find it useful. And I also wanted to thank the community here for their swift answers!

The prints look really great! I went with 7500x7500 to be on the safe side, and dpi of at least 150. Used Affinity > Resize document. The photos are printed on dibond full colour.