• Welcome to the Lightroom Queen Forums! We're a friendly bunch, so please feel free to register and join in the conversation. If you're not familiar with forums, you'll find step by step instructions on how to post your first thread under Help at the bottom of the page. You're also welcome to download our free Lightroom Quick Start eBooks and explore our other FAQ resources.
  • Stop struggling with Lightroom! There's no need to spend hours hunting for the answers to your Lightroom Classic questions. All the information you need is in Adobe Lightroom Classic - The Missing FAQ!

    To help you get started, there's a series of easy tutorials to guide you through a simple workflow. As you grow in confidence, the book switches to a conversational FAQ format, so you can quickly find answers to advanced questions. And better still, the eBooks are updated for every release, so it's always up to date.
  • 12 December 2024 It's Lightroom update time again! See What’s New in Lightroom Classic 14.1, Mobile & Desktop (December 2024)? for Feature updates, new cameras and lenses, and bug fixes.

Print module Help with output for print urgently needed

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Mike Taylor

Mike Taylor
Premium Classic Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2019
Messages
80
Location
Deal, Kent, UK
Lightroom Experience
Intermediate
Lightroom Version
Classic
Lightroom Version Number
13.2
Operating System
  1. macOS 14 Sonoma
Hi team
I know NOTHING about printing and never print my own work.
But I have a client who has asked for an image to be printed LARGE - like 2m across.
I gave him a 300dpi TIFF file but he's now come back and suggested i resize it "for the best quality"
The image is from my Q2 and it's 8368x5584 pixels.
I output it full size and didn't limit the dimensions.
I've also offered him an DNG.
Is there something obvious I've missed here or is he talking out of his hat?
As I said, I know nothing about printing so I',m at a loss about how to proceed.
Anything anyone can suggest would be more than welcome.
Best,
Mike
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot 2024-09-02 at 14.10.27.png
    Screenshot 2024-09-02 at 14.10.27.png
    1.5 MB · Views: 49
Sort by date Sort by votes
At 300 dpi, your image is at an ideal size of 0.7mX0.5m. I have printed with a 110 dpi size and have had an acceptable print. So without resizing, that would be 2m x ~1.3 m at 110dpi.

Resizing certainly won't hurt. However in Lightroom you will need to go back to the original RAW file to enhance to 2X with SuperSize. I would take the finished TIFF file to Photoshop or Topaz Gigapixel AI to resize. to 23622px X 15763 px
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
clee01l said:
At 300 dpi, your image is at an ideal size of 0.7mX0.5m. I have printed with a 110 dpi size and have had an acceptable print. So without resizing, that would be 2m x ~1.3 m at 110dpi.

Resizing certainly won't hurt. However in Lightroom you will need to go back to the original RAW file to enhance to 2X with SuperSize. I would take the finished TIFF file to Photoshop or Topaz Gigapixel AI to resize. to 23622px X 15763 px
Click to expand...
Hi
Many thanks for this.
I've finally got to the actual printer and he thinks the file I supplied (100+mb 300dpi TIFF at 8368x5584 px) will be ample to do a print 2m wide.
He thought our mutual client was fussing about nothing.
But it's at least got me thinking - and made me realise why I want nothing to do with printing.
Leave it to the experts...
Best
Mike
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Your client has a strong belief that upscaling is going to deliver magic results with a 2m print, which may or may not be true. I am glad that you reached out to your printer, as their opinion is the one that counts with respect to printing the image. And as Cletus alluded to, the PPI may be less than the ideal 300 since a print this large is not going to generally be viewed at close distances.

Good luck,

--Ken
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
One note that hasn't been mentioned - if you're shipping it off for someone else to print, I would do yourself a favour and make it a colour space of sRGB for lowest-common-denominator printing. I've had clients come back to me complaining about prints they made on their own from the master final JPEGs I delivered which look fine on their screens but Print Lab X didn't do a good job in creating prints.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
JeffHamonPhotography said:
One note that hasn't been mentioned - if you're shipping it off for someone else to print, I would do yourself a favour and make it a colour space of sRGB for lowest-common-denominator printing. I've had clients come back to me complaining about prints they made on their own from the master final JPEGs I delivered which look fine on their screens but Print Lab X didn't do a good job in creating prints.
Click to expand...
Perhaps it is more important to use the color profile recommended by the print lab. sRGB is the worst gamut to print from. AdobeRGB would be better and a color profile specific to the printer and paper would be best. If you send an image saved with a color profile different from the one the print lab uses, thay ofter will automatically convert it to a color profile specific to the printer and paper being used.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Gotta laugh at the dimensional mishmash we have in printing. In these few posts we have metres, pixels count, dots per inch, pixels per inch and even mega bytes. We could have confused thing further by trying to match sensor aspect ratios with photographic paper sizes with commercial picture framing sizes. But I digress. Sorry! I just find it comical.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
BobT said:
Gotta laugh at the dimensional mishmash we have in printing. In these few posts we have metres, pixels count, dots per inch, pixels per inch and even mega bytes. We could have confused thing further by trying to match sensor aspect ratios with photographic paper sizes with commercial picture framing sizes. But I digress. Sorry! I just find it comical.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, it is a bit of a mish mash at times. But surprisingly, we often seem to keep the conversation moving forward. And at least we do not have to deal with sensor size equivalency discussions that plague so many photo forums.

--Ken
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Mishmash. Exactly why I don't print my work for me or for clients. It's a dark art to me, so I leave it to people who I trust know what they're doing. Difficult when you're dealing with a client's chosen designer/printer.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
mike-parkandbridge said:
Difficult when you're dealing with a client's chosen designer/printer.
Click to expand...
Generally better working with directly with the printer than working through the client, as evidenced by your follow-up post above. At least they understand the mish mash and know what they need. Hope all turns out well.

--Ken
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Replytoken said:
Generally better working with directly with the printer than working through the client, as evidenced by your follow-up post above. At least they understand the mish mash and know what they need. Hope all turns out well.

--Ken
Click to expand...
I use a 3rd party print lab that ideally can accept 16 bit TIFFs, Specifies a color profile other than sRGB. and can supply their icc profiled used for Soft Proofing. WHCC is my preferred online print lab https://www.whcc.com/help
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
clee01l said:
I use a 3rd party print lab that ideally can accept 16 bit TIFFs, Specifies a color profile other than sRGB. and can supply their icc profiled used for Soft Proofing. WHCC is my preferred online print lab https://www.whcc.com/help
Click to expand...
I use WHCC as well, but sometimes clients want what they want. Thankfully for the OP, the printer knew how to handle what the client thought they know how to handle. It helps to be fluent in mish mash.

--Ken
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top