Very high res rendering
-
You could split your render into multiple regions and stick them together in a photoeditor. (I doubt any photo editor will be able to handle it).
Thomthom camera tools, might be used to control the splitting but you would have to be able to do the maths.
But sincerely... I would question the base of the issue:
-
I doubt you need 300dpi for those 5m2. A computer screen is usually 90dpi though that depends on screen size vs resolution. A magazine can be printed in 150dpi; High quality printing for small stuff goes up to 300dpi. From 150dpi to 300dpi you can only see the difference from about 30cm-20cm from paper.
-
A 5m2 plot is half the size of a small room, people who look at it from 30cm distance won't be able to see the bigger picture.
-
-
For a poster > A0 no need to have more than 25 dpi !
It's made for see it to 3 meter or more
Formula resolution for human eye 76 DPI for 1 meter
So 5 meters = 15 DPI
6,3 cm 1200 dpi
12,7 cm 600 dpi
20 cm 380 dpi
25,3 cm 300 dpi
30 cm 253 dpi
40 cm 190 dpi
50 cm 152 dpi
60 cm 127 dpi
76 cm 100 dpi
80 cm 95 dpi
90 cm 84 dpi
1 m 76 dpi
1,50 m 50 dpi
2 m 38 dpi
2,50 m 30 dpi
3 m 25 dpi
4 m 19 dpi
5 m 15 dpi
10 m 7,6 dpi
15 m 5,1 dpi
20 m 3,8 dpi1 cm² at 300 dpi need 300² / 2.54² pixels.
So for 15 DPI 15² / 2.54² pixels
225 / 6.4516 = 34.875
so for 5 meters 34.875 * 500 = 17 437 . 5348
Seems an image 17 450 * 17 450 pixels will be sufficient
304 502 504 pixels Yet 892 megas! -
@pilou said:
For a poster > A0 no need to have more than 25 dpi !
It's made for see it to 3 meter or more
Formula resolution for human eye 76 DPI for 1 meter
So 5 meters = 15 DPI
You may be right, pilou, but skylabridges already explained he doesn't make a poster but a high quality art image.
I can imagine he has some very complex scene in which you do need to stand close to see fine details. For example, just imagine a big image of one part of New York City and you want that cars and people are recognizable enough. I would like to see his model - probably he was working on it like a slave.
I also doubdt he needs 300 dpi but probably he cannot go under 150 dpi, and maybe 200 dpi, which is also very, very fine. Indeed.
Dpi (dots per inch) is a printing term.
skylabridge, if you take JQL's advice about splitting your render into multiple regions, then first try to find out which photo editor can do the job.
High-end medium-format camera manufacturers have cameras which take photos of 60 Mp and even 80 Mp (Hasselblad H4D-60, H5D-60, PhaseOne IQ2 Digital backs etc...). It's still 5-10 less than what you need, but those cameras are used by professionals so why not to contact some of them. I'm sure they join their biiiig RAW photos in order to make some panoramic images so maybe they can give you a word of advice about possible photo editors.
-
@aureus said:
You may be right, pilou, but skylabridges already explained he doesn't make a poster but a high quality art image.
I can imagine he has some very complex scene in which you do need to stand close to see fine details. For example, just imagine a big image of one part of New York City and you want that cars and people are recognizable enough. I would like to see his model - probably he was working on it like a slave.
I also doubdt he needs 300 dpi but probably he cannot go under 150 dpi, and maybe 200 dpi, which is also very, very fine. Indeed.
My thoughts exacly.
-
If the image is not placed on the ground i am curious about the destination of it for a such resolution!
-
Thank you all for your responses. I've been researching a bit further, and you're all right - perhaps 300 DPI is too high! But I think it will need to be 150 DPI, as it is important the images are kept sharp because although you get full effect from a distance, people will still be able to view them closely. So, it'll still need to be 3 times larger than podium can offer. I am using photoshop as my photo editor. So, I guess I should try to work out thomthoms camera tools and try exporting in segments and see how I get on from there!
-
@pilou said:
If the image is not placed on the ground i am curious about the destination of it for a such resolution!
Who knows, dear pilou, who knows.
Maybe the walls of:
a) a sheik's residence
b) an art gallery
c) some expensive hotel or club
d) etc...Sometimes we have silly wishes but sometimes we get some extraordinary comission.
skylabridges,
I hope you'll step by here to tell us your solution once you finish your work.
It may widen knowledge of some of us.
It's not everyday that someone prints a high-res 5m-sq art-work.After all - if you don't find a printer which can print it all at once - maybe you don't need an image editor to merge partial high-res images.
-
Yes, you're right Aureus - it's for an art gallery, and it will be printed in pieces, so perhaps I don't need to join it up after. What I think I need to do is find a plugin which can keep the image as a still object, other than to move to different areas of it, but all on the same plane, because as soon as I use the hand to move around, it changes the angles. I hope what I've written makes sense, and does anyone know if this plugin exists?!
Anyway, I'll keep this thread updated on my quest for large scale printing!
-
@skylabridges said:
Yes, you're right Aureus - it's for an art gallery, and it will be printed in pieces, so perhaps I don't need to join it up after. What I think I need to do is find a plugin which can keep the image as a still object, other than to move to different areas of it, but all on the same plane, because as soon as I use the hand to move around, it changes the angles. I hope what I've written makes sense, and does anyone know if this plugin exists?!
Anyway, I'll keep this thread updated on my quest for large scale printing!
Thom thom camera tools, as I said. Just move the shift x and shift y around and you'll get what you need.
It's a pity we can't render from within Layout, as you could easily do the splitting there
EDIT : If you can't do the maths, just design a grid in your full perspective scene, with the amount of columns and rows you'd need to split the image.
Then you can have a visual reference for shift Y and Shift X
-
The image below was printed out for a Gallery. It is mounted on wall and is viewed standing.
There were 4 pieces mounted on a single board. The final resolution was 15,360 X 8640 at 300dpi. The poster size was 80" X 42". It was hung only 12" off the ground. Of course you needed to be 7 feet tall to look at the detail at the top so as everyone has pointed out the viewing position is the most important consideration.The poster is just fun to look at because of the detail. 300 dpi was about right. I worked my way down from approx. 500dpi printing test strips for the client. The beach guys in the small image are inside that little red dot....lol.
-
Thank you so much JQL - I'm going to try this now. I'll let you know how I get on! Roland Joseph - how did you manage to render at such a high resolution for such a large image? Did you also cut yours into pieces?!
Skyla -
There were 4 renderings. My rendering software is capable of 7680 X 4320 and actually I have given you the wrong numbers sorry, I was using my memory which is getting pretty bad apparenty ........ Here it is exactly:We took the largest render we could achieve 7680 X 4320 and then began printing test strips to see how far we could enlarge and print it so that the detail was clear while standing and viewing. The images were lining a hallway that people traveled through and so we had a height limit of 9 feet.
The original image specs are these:
When enlarged from 7.557 inches at 1016 dpi to 40 inches the image was then 40,650 X 22866
That's pretty unmanageable..lol. I tried 500 dpi still to big, then 300 dpi which worked out great for the detail at the viewing position.At 300 dpi the pixel count was reduced to as you see it below...12000X6750
All of the final prints were 4 print collages except for two. The images that were sewn together were set up by hand basically...by adjusting the camera lens length and repositioning to get as orthogonal as possible over the section. That was not easy (shadows drove me nuts) Camera Tools might help but if you are creating one image it can be done within the renderer by-eye with some struggle.
So the final mounted images were exactly 24000 X 13500 @300dpi. 80 inches X 45 inches.
-
hey...no trouble...your welcome....
-
haha, sorry Roland Joseph - thank you!
-
I wonder what was the solution after all.
-
Sorry this has taken so long to report back. In short the answer was that I could only render reliably at 9999 x 9999 pix. I couldn't get to grips with splitting the image using camera tools. I ended up enlarging the renders in perfect resize and got pretty good results from this.
Advertisement