ISO - Super High Res Images

[jfiscus]

I have a SUPER picky customer looking for elevator murals, and they want them to be crystal clear images at 85" tall x 68" wide.
They argue that since people will be standing about a foot away staring at them while they await getting to their floor that the image should not have any artifacts.
It seems that most stock photo sites consider "XXL" image sto be around 5616 x 3744 which is even smaller.

We purchased one image at 5847 x 3972 pixels (largest I could find) from Getty and up-sampled it using Genuine Fractals in OnOne Perfect Resize to 12515 x 8500 pixels, and the image looks great to me, but not to them...

They are willing to pay for any images we can find and time it takes to find them.
Anyone know where to get SUPER high res?

AND BTW, the image has to be of the Cincinnati, Ohio skyline or something similar.

 

[crystalcoastgraphics]

Maybe reach out to a local photographer there and see if the images can be taken or if there is one who is well known for images of that area and they can be purchased from ones already taken.

 

[Correct Color]

What about the image didn't the client like?

My guess is that it's got more to do with artifacts of the photograph itself that were blown up in the enlargement process than with the pixel dimensions. To get a photo at that size to be crystal clear, it's pretty much going to have to be shot to be that size, meaning shot in some large format to begin with, and shot by someone who really understands what they're doing.

If the client has the money and wants to spend it, it sounds to me like a fun project to do.

 

[boxerbay]

sort of like a possible client i have pending. he want photos of 1920 monaco grand prix for a 50'x30' backdrop. I have search everywhere and photo from that time that large do not exist.

 

[boxerbay]

find a gigapan photo of cincinatti.

 

[boxerbay]

Panoramic Photography | Panoramic Images | Hi-Res Images | GigaPan

 

[jfiscus]

Panoramic Photography | Panoramic Images | Hi-Res Images | GigaPan

Never heard of this site before, but the only photo I see that is similar (The Queen City)actually looks WORSE than the one I have currently blown up...

 

[Billct2]

I think hiring a local pro photographer is a great idea. They can get the exact shot they want and maybe use it in other marketing materials.

 

[jfiscus]

What about the image didn't the client like?

My guess is that it's got more to do with artifacts of the photograph itself that were blown up in the enlargement process than with the pixel dimensions. To get a photo at that size to be crystal clear, it's pretty much going to have to be shot to be that size, meaning shot in some large format to begin with, and shot by someone who really understands what they're doing.

If the client has the money and wants to spend it, it sounds to me like a fun project to do.

Yeah, that is the issue. They are taking the print which looks great a couple feet away and holding it up about 6 inches from their face and saying it isn't clear enough...

 

[printhog]

best target resolution for viewing at 1 foot is 100 ppi for human vision, but you can bump to 150 and go for overkill.. so your output target is 8,500x6,800px @100ppi, or 12,750x10,200px @150 ppi. after 150 ppi its silly.. no one will see that definition.

Had a hospital do same thing to me years back. The cost of high res stock and usage rights for cafeteria murals was so great, and they're expectations were so high, that I hired a local helicopter and local tv cameraman to shoot high res large format color positives! Cost $4,000 but I billed $13,000 for 26 photos..

I really cant stress this part enough - drum scan the film positives at 8,000 dpi in colormatch rgb ICC profile.. do the color conversion to cmyk yourself..

Even the best hasselblad with a $50,000 digital back will not deliver the image quality of a 4"x5" positive drum scanned by a pro shop. (in reality, itd do fine for the output they want. But they may not want to buy that. The super high res film is an over the top upsell, and picky picky people will go for it - some people buy lamborghinis)

That'll give you 32,000 by 40,000 pxl. Want bigger, shoot on 8"x10" with a box camera. Many camera stores rent this stuff. For panoramas, try find a photographer with a Noblex 175 rotating lens camera. These shoot on standard 220 roll film, but the slides are massive 2.3"x6.8" long and distortion free. That gives you 18,400 x 54,400px..

If i were you I'd do the photos and make some $$$. At least $500 each. they get the films and usage rights.. big selling point there..

For film you want to shoot with Fuji Provia RDP III 100 speed. Rent a camera, lenses, tripod and exposure meter. Its actually easy. 4"x5" slide film is $75 per 20. Camera rental is likely $150/day. Or hire someone. Processing is E6. Drum scanning and film processing suggestion would be Photographic Lab Services | Duggal Visual Solutions

I'd do it for you but I'd want the $500 a pop and travel.

 

[Logoadv]

I'm shuddering to think what equipment would cost that will take crystal clear photos at that scale. We did a trailer wrap for a workwear company once where there was a boot on the side provided by Timberland. I have never seen before or since a picture that clear, down to the individual strands in the thread that makes up the stitches, and the texture of edge of the leather pieces. We actually ended up scaling the image down because it would bog down the computer, but was still razor sharp when printed.

 

[Johnny Best]

I use a Nikon D800 camera with a Micro110mm lens or 35mm lens and capture in RAW format, they are crystal clear at close view when blown up to a large size using Photoshop or Lightroom. Using a film camera and then a have someone with drum scanner with film positives is expensive and dated. Like others have said, get a professional photographer to do the pics for you or save to buy your own equipment. Some people do buy Lamborghinis but that would make you a car salesman.

 

[paul luszcz]

print hog describes the process very well and I would do something very similar EXCEPT:

I don't have or ever intend to buy the equipment he describes. I also wouldn't know how to use it well enough to rent the equipment.

What I do know is a couple of good repro shops or photo studios that do this kind of work.

Find one in your area and do the art direction and print production.

They'll do the photography and scanning, giving you a high quality, super high res file.

 

[Correct Color]

A few lifetimes ago I used to drum scan 4x5 transparencies, and that indeed is the way to go to get the look your client is after. Most likely, it's enlarged 35 mm film grain they're seeing that's annoying them, and of course the only way to get rid of it completely is to not use 35 mm film.

I would quibble with this though...

I really cant stress this part enough - drum scan the film positives at 8,000 dpi in colormatch rgb ICC profile.. do the color conversion to cmyk yourself...

You actually can only scan in the scanner's color space -- which it has, just like any other device. The correct color management procedure is to scan, assign the scanner's color space to the RGB scanned image, and then convert that image into some standard color working space; where and how you'd do this would depend on your software. For a working space, most likely for a skyline shot, sRGB would probably be okay, and Adobe 1998 would be more than enough.

Then of course the only conversion to CMYK should be by your RIP at print time to your printer profile, and of course the quality of your printer profile and how well it matches what your printer actually prints will determine your final result.

 

[printhog]

I mentioned staying in RGB because some drum scanners I've known opt to convert the image to cmyk common to old school pre-press. Many of these machines are older tech. I've owned two different models of drum scanner, one was dedicated by its internal system to produce CMYK files. The other gave a vastly better result due to an RGB workflow. Ask the scanner operator what format the machine produces.

The film grain issue is very real with some high res stock files. You never know if it was shot at that resolution or just up sampled so they could sell you a pricier image.

As a tip to find a photographer.. contact the news director of a station in the area you need the photo. Ask for names of stringers. Explain why. You'll likely get two or three. These are free lance photographers who are used to shooting for multiple formats and for a small fee. They also know where to get the best shot in the community and have very good equipment. They would likely get you a quality digital image. Specify what you want.

Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk

 

[jfiscus]

I reached out to a couple local photographers (including my brother, a pro photographer) and sent the referrals on to the client to deal with them directly. After they get the photo shoot negotiated we will get involved again.