WHAT is the BEST DPI to PRINT at?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 10 ก.พ. 2019
- What’s the best DPI to print at? Breaking the rules led me to a discovery that can give you the best digital prints I’ve ever seen. Printing from files with resolutions higher than 300 dpi lead to a significant quality gain with the Canon PRO series printers. I lay it all out in this video. Thanks for Watching!
My Book - Expert Photo Processing by Rich Seiling
www.richseiling.com/store/p/e...
Workshops - www.richseiling.com/schedule
Online Video Course - richseiling.thinkific.com/cou...
Website - www.richseiling.com/
Substack - richseiling.substack.com/
Unlimited Cloud Backup for $9 a month with Backblaze - www.backblaze.com/cloud-backu...
Some of these links include affiliate links for which I receive a commission.
2023/2/25 update
Professionals have used the terms DPI and PPI interchangeably for years to mean the same thing. For example, the Barnes & Noble Press self publishing service specification guide specifies image resolution as "DPI". It is important that new photographers know of this longstanding convention to communicate with designers, offset printing services, and professional photographers.
In this video when I'm taking about dpi, it means the same thing as ppi.
I've made many prints with this high process for years, and continue to be astounded with the quality it produces.
This process also works for Epson printers, up to about 720ppi.
Very helpful! Thanks
Wow.it's really helpful for us.
Perfect approach!
And a good explanation!
Thank you!
Perfect timing, Rich! I was making a couple of prints on my Epson P800 just this morning and the default (I think) dpi setting on the printer was 72. I've made hundreds of what I thought were quality prints on that printer without investigating the dpi choices. I did bump it up today to 100, coincidentallty, and the photos look great, but I can't wait do make more prints and follow your "give it all the resolution you can" advice. Thanks for this post.
Glad to help Doug. 100 ppi and lower is very low quality, so I suggest you investigate those settings more and you will see a great improvement if you do. Also be aware that the ppi of the file is very different from the quality settings in the printer driver that set the dpi of the printer.
@@richseiling Thanks Rich. I get it and have seen a big difference in my latest prints!
Thanks for the education
☺👍🏾
Any time!
+1 for the advice of preserving higher resolution when sending the image to the printer
Thank you
Hey! Did you line up the prints and pull each one away and then run the video backwards? Because that was satisfying to watch!
That is exactly what I did! I liked how it came out too!
You should be referring to PPI.
DPI = Dots Per Inch (printing resolution - how printing dots are used to make up the pixels). PPI = Pixels Per Inch (image resolution - how many pixels are there per inch).
This is one of those issues that seem to get people worked up. In the pro world, dpi has been used interchangeable with ppi for decades. I can't tell you how many designers and book publishers have asked me for files in dpi, and I know an award winning graphic designer that tells me he always describes it as dpi. But to avoid confusion, ppi is probably the better term to use, and I'm working on retraining my brain for the modern convention.
@@richseiling9310 👍 I think it's time that everyone learnt the proper meaning of the terms, but because the misconception is so widespread, I doubt the confusion/misunderstanding will be cleared up anytime soon.
@@nateb69 I agree it's better to refer to file resolution in ppi to avoid confusion of printer dpi. It makes it more clear for the most number of people even if the seasoned veterans use it interchangeably. The comments I got from this video here and elsewhere have prompted me to make the distinction clear going forward. SO technically the title should now be "What is the best PPI to print from?"
yes as you can give a say 500PPI file to the canon, but chose diff print DPI in the driver, like 300-600 etc@@richseiling9310
I recently bought my first photo printer and am trying to get the absolute most out of it I can. Thanks for helping me to accomplish this!
Thanks Norm, glad to help!
Good stuff Rich! Though most prints are larger than native so would it make sense to throw extra info at it during that process?
Thanks Aaron. I think I know what you asking, tell me if this answers it. As you make larger prints, the dpi will naturally drop. That is OK, and as you know with your own prints you can make a very beautiful large print at less than 300 dpi. But if you had say a 100MP camera, you could give larger prints more dpi, and they would resolve even more detail. Basically, whatever the size, give it all the real resolution you have if you are on a printer that can handle it.
Rich are there any services online that can print at higher dpis like 600 or 900? I can't seem to find any that say they will print at this dpi
Thank you. I have a Sony a99ii. I have some awesome photos, I sent one out for print, yet when I received it, it was grainy. It was set at about 272dpi. I need to be able to have super clear images at like 40"x60".
Most likely cause of this is the ISO. Higher ISO causes more noise (grain). Fantastic 40x60 prints are possible from 42 megapixels, but it requires some special processing, Gigapixel AI, etc.
Well I am not surprised the Canon got better up to 600dpi, since 600dpi is the native dpi in highest quality mode (720dpi for Epson). I am, however, very surprised that there was much difference past 600dpi. Have you looked at the prints with a loupe?
With a loupe, the sharpness and detail is very evident. The gain in quality follows a curve, more gain at the beginning, and lower gain at the higher end, but it's still there.
Say you're printing simple text in black and white and on one printer you get sharp corners (like on the letter L for example). But on another printer (my Epson 1100), you get sort of a rounded corner, just enough to be annoying. What do they call that? I'm sure there's a word for it. The 1100 has excellent resolution also. -- anyone know ? or you Rich ? -- thanks
Dang! 0:39
I had no idea DPI went so much higher than 300!
What does it mean of "max resolution: 1200x1800 dpi" on printer specification??
Hi there, my printer power recently went out and now looking for a good all in one printer now. There's 2, the Canon MG6320 with 9600 x 2400 dpi and the Canon MG6420 with 4800 x 1200 dpi. Any recommendations or am I comparing wrong? THX!!
That's maximum print resolution. I don't have a clue why Canon just says dpi instead of maximum print resolution. It's rather misleading.
The MG6320 can print of larger pieces of paper which is largely why it's maximum print resolution is so much higher.
Hey, I’ve been asked to arrange a photo for a giant mural (2.3m by 6m) what would be a good dpi for such a thing, people can walk freely around it so viewing distance isn’t really set
On a print that big, you need to work closely with your print provider. Printers used to print this big are made for signage and follow different rules than photo printers like a Canon Pro-4000 or the Epsons. Email me from the makebetterprints.com website if you want to talk more about how you are printing this.
Rich, I'm curious at what range of viewing distances you were using where you could most see the differences in sharpness, and at what further viewing distance you would start to have not seen a difference. Using more math than personal experience, admittedly, it seems to me that the latter distance should have been about 23 inches UNLESS the argument is true that typical imperfections in a camera-and-lens system (taking into account interpolation using the bayer sensor for instance) make for an effectively lower resolution image than what the real resolution (based on the number of photosites) is, thus making the the image look not as sharp except perhaps at an even larger viewing distance. If the effective resolution is as bad as being half of the real resolution, then the math tells me that at about or just under 23 inches viewing distance one might need about 424 PPI pixel density (300 PPI times the square root of 2) after which one would not notice greater sharpness with greater pixel density (even for a person with great visual acuity observing a well-lit print). Does that jive with your (or anyone's) findings? Of course a greater pixel density WOULD be needed for a closer (if perhaps less comfortable) inspection. I'm borrowing from the math here which seems to be respected by quite a few sources including photoeducators: www.scss.com.au/family/andrew/camera/resolution/
I searched this thinking, do i need high resolution photo camera ? Hmm, i might try searcing if ther is any diffrence 300 vs 600dpi. I they tell me that is better 600 dpi i will sell my d700 nikon and i will buy d850. Watching this video i took the conclusion i need high resolution camera. Reading your comment i dont need it ..... In conclusion, this video may be a hidden strategy to sell expensive high resolution cameras to unexperenced people like me.. Thank you Stacy!
@@giuliamocristi1021 You're welcome Giuliamo! Your photos at least should not look pixelated at two or even somewhat less feet away at 300 PPI - even if they might look a little sharper at say 424 PPI. Too high of PPI though (like perhaps 600) and your depth of field may be too thin for your liking. And if you are only letting your viewers view your print at quite a few feet, there is no point printing at even 300 PPI - quite a bit less is more than enough! Likely the rare keen-eyed person who greatly appreciates more than 300 PPI would see the difference in a small print but not a large print. A 21 megapixel photo (from say a 24 megapixel camera) is more than enough to make very keen-eyed people happy for size-compelled viewing distances, while half that res of 10.5 (from a 12 megapixel camera) is likely enough for most people and for those viewing distances. Even half of that or a quarter of that (say a 2.6 megapixel photo) can look good at a distance, but I would not go smaller.
Any tips for getting a similar result if we send our photos to a lab instead of printing at home?
Hi Zach, I offer this process at BespokePrintmaking.com. Since it requires making such large files, I imaging only more boutique printing studios will offer it.
Wonderful video! I have a quick question though, if I don't have a digital image that I want to print, but rather a photgraph I already have, then can I scan it with a high end scanner that goes up to 900 dpi & then be able to print in 900 dpi as well? Thanks so much! :)
Yes you can, but a print holds much less detail than a digital file, so you won't see as much benefit as you will when printing from a digital camera file.
@@richseiling Thanks so much! So, if I want really high quality printed images such as the 900 dpi you printed, then it's always best to have a digital image you take with a high-end camera?
Digital camera files of the original scene always have more resolution than a print made from that file. So for the best quality, you want to work from the original camera file, or the original film. In cases where there is no digital file or film, and you only have a print, then you just make do with what you have.
@@richseiling Sweet! Thanks for the information, it'll really help me :)
@@ZombieProdigyUS Glad to help!
That's for this, Rich .... I have always wondered about that. What I have found recently though is the the 300dpi setting seems to be that magic number where the printer will print exactly the right size. For example a 1500x2100px file will print an image of exactly 5x7" on the paper. So if I increase my dpi, the printer will shrink the printed image accordingly (leaving the Scaling at 100%). So my question is how do you print at a high DPI and handle the print sizing?
When I set up a file for printing using Photoshop, I enter in the height and width in addition to the PPI of the file. Then when I print to a Canon or Epson printer, it uses that embedded height and width to side the image correctly. Used this method for literally hundreds of thousands of prints at the lab I founded. Would need to know know whole process to diagnose what is happening with your setup.
@@richseiling hmmmm..... interesting. I am using Affinity Photo with a Mac and a Canon g1220 4 color printer. So I can not see any way to have Affinity Photo determine the print size and DPI of the print ... It all goes through the dreaded Apple Airprint driver. But my question is - would my printer be capable of printing a resolution higher than 300dpi? And why is that the DPI value of 300 is the "magic" number that scales the print size perfectly at 100%?
@@DaveRenfroe I don't use Affinity so I can't explain how it works, but from a quick search, it appears that the "Resize Document" option under the "document" menu is similar to the "Image Side" dialog in Photoshop. If you are using a inkjet printer from Canon or Epson, it is likely able to give you more detailed print if your file has more than 300ppi.
You are so right, Rich. I printed two 6.6x4.7" prints (allowing for the un-printable margin) at 300dpi and 600dpi. The detail came out much better on the 600dpi one, even on my "consumer grade" printer. And I was able to easily calculate the exact size of the prints. I notice that the print driver does look at the DPI setting embedded in the image file, so its a matter of balancing that and your image size in pixels to get the size you want on the paper. It takes a good sized file to print anything big. At 600dpi, for a photo right out of my Nikon D3300, the largest I can print is 10" on the long side (6000px). .......Thanks 👍
Thanks Rich!
Given this concept, will a 16x20 at native resolution, say 100dpi, be more detailed than a 16x20 upresed to 300dpi?
Upres is a whole different situation. My first question is why is your file size so small that you only have 100 dpi at 16x20? Upres does not replace real resolution so it's always a compromise.
Make Better Prints Rich, I was just using simple numbers to be clear. I’m understanding your idea to say that native resolution may be more clear than upresing that same file to a higher dpi for printing. When my new drum scanner arrives, I’ll have 500 dpi native resolution for 40x50 prints from 8x10 film. Exciting. I just don’t want to “over scan” if it isn’t beneficial. Thank you!
With film there is a point of diminishing returns for the increase in effort. 3500-4000 dpi is at the pain point where more quality will take a lot bigger file and be harder do deal with, and you will see variance from frame to frame depending on how sharp the original film is. Do you use my layer transfer method for working on super large files? I need to do a new video on it. Old one is a decade old and in SD quality.
Make Better Prints That’s what I’m trying to decipher. I know we discussed this long ago. I’d enjoy seeing your article and method. Thanks!
What about sharpening? I would expect the printer upsampling would apply some amount of sharpening. On the Epson, the upsampling algorithm is supposedly Nearest Neighbor, which is pretty crappy. I don't know about Canon. Charlie C
Hi Charlie, I am sharpening as I normally would, which is by eye based on appearance at 100%. Taking older 300dpi 16x20 files and printing them as a 600dpi 8x10 works really well. Noise behaves differently too. I don't know if the Canon is up-sampling in printer, or if it can really take all that data and convert it to the stochastic screen dots, but whatever it is doing looks really good. I've printed up to 1200 dpi files that hold incredibly fine detail. Don't know about the Epson but I think it can handle more resolution as well. At a clients house yesterday, he was printing a file at about 600 dpi on Epson 3880 and it looked significantly sharper than a 240 dpi print of the same image I made for him on my Canon. The Epson at 600 dpi looked like what I would expect from the canon at a similar resolution, but I really need to investigate the Epson more. If you are on Epson, I'd say test it and see what happens. Paper can make a difference too. This test was on Canson Platine Fibre Rag, but also works on Canon Luster.
I'm an artist which dpi and Resolution should I use for all art prints?
Depends on printing and art style, 600dpi is minimum, the best peace of mind is 1200dpi, TIFF file format, exporting JPEGs from it. Museum scanners use 1200dpi optical, Giclee prints 1200dpi to 4500dpi. But working on 4500dpi is overkill. If you print on commercial printers, like Offset or any like ads, the Maximum is 300dpi, Outdoor prints 150dpi is the maximum.
what paper did you use to print that? why it's look little glossy? is that because of the printer or something?
I can't remember if these test prints were on a luster paper or a baryta paper, both of which have a semi-gloss and picked up a little reflection in the pic ;)
Im gonna do a 80x40 cm mousepad sublimation print. What dpi should i use. Im gonna send it to a shop for them to print
You should ask the print provider for their specs. This video applies to printing at home on high end inkjet printers. Different output methods and devices will use different ppi.
@@richseiling ive sent them with a 300ppi jpg and it came back with blurry edges. Ive ordered a new one with 600ppi png photo. I hope its better now
Great. What about the question how large can I print? With that question there still seems to be the question of what DPI should I print at?
You can print as big as you want. There is no magic answer for what PPI becomes unacceptable when you go big. . I've made gallery prints at 48x72 from 24MP and smaller prints. You just have to test and see what is acceptable to you.
@@richseiling did you have to print out sections of each photo to blow it up that large? How would you go about doing that? Could you crop the photo up into sections? 🤔
So what should the workflow be to et it ready to send to you for printing? If I have a 24mp camera, how should I develop and save the file? Color calibrating, DPI/PPI, it's all so damn confusing, you have to be a photo engineer to figure this stuff out.
Allen, I can't fit an answer into the comment section, but all this stuff is learnable, if not a little overwhelming at times with all the variables. It's kinda like learning to cook and use increasingly complex recipes. Check out studio.th-cam.com/users/videoDwx-5gv-v3E/edit to get some insight on how to set the right ppi in a file for this process. Also, what software are you using to edit/process?
Link appears to be broken. Can you redirect please - thanks!
But how do I know if my printer has enough dpi for optimum quality?
Say a 100 mp picture printed at 1.2 meter large print and 30 cm viewing distance?
That all depends on your quality expectations, but a 1.2 meter (on the long) print is going to be fantastic. Might need Topaz for upscaling, but I haven't run the numbers. I don't factor viewing distance in, other than I try to make it look the best it can at any viewing distance. I like detail and like to view prints up close, but how good they look up close depends on your original capture, print size, and processing. 100mp is going to make a 40x50 inch print that is better than 4x5 film could, and resolve very fine details.
I've always increased my resolution to at least 300 DPI printing. Where my struggle is, is the difference between screen and print. I've tried the screen profile approach for different printers without a whole lot of noticeable improvement. Any thoughts on this?
By "screen profile" do you mean Soft Proofing? I don't use Soft Proofing. The difference between screen to print is something I talk about on my workshops as even with a reference grade monitor, highlights and shadows don't display as accurately on screen because one is transmitted light and the print is reflected light. It is a bridgeable gap, but does require setting up a correct print viewing environment.
It just seems obvious to use the maximum DPI for prints. So, Why in the first did/do people print with anything less?
It's no surprise that your prints are going to look better when you print with the highest quality settings. I'm genuinely confused as this isn't my field of expertise. Please explain.
Early fine art output devices like the LightJet/Chromira/Lambda were physically constrained to about 300dpi when printing, and the workflow required giving those devices precisely prepared files. This early workflow has been carried over by many based on old standards, as well as beliefs that inkjet printers couldn't use more information effectively.
I have LBP-800 its OK primter to print photo in lowest resolution?
This video is going to help you with Photo quality printers. I can't speak to how document/business printers handle this.
@@richseiling i say its ok to print photo rid a comment and complian!
If I scan at 1200 pixels per inch or highest resolution for Printing will that give me the best quality and resolution print?
Scanning resolution is a separate question. In general, when possible, scan at the highest OPTICAL resolution, but since every scanner is different, what spi you scan at may vary.
So If I make a negative at 3200 DPI I just use that file?
Are you making digital negatives for alternative processes?
how about for t shirt printing?
I used 1000 dpi for my print book cover,
do you think it's too much?
And do you think it's more expensive?
Do you also know if amazon,
and other places allow me to use 1000 dpi?
Excus me for all the questions..
What resolution was the photo ?
If I recall correctly, about 17,500 x 14,000 pixel scan from a 4x5 E-6 Chrome. It was a big scan.
Thank you for this info. It applies to art printing too. For people saying "why would I want to make a jumbo print with 600dpi level of detail? It's unnecessary cause people are looking at it from farther away." Well, that's a very ignorant statement to assume no one wants to look close and from afar in the same print. ESPECIALLY in the art world. Look at this: th-cam.com/video/O4HOOCVuUS0/w-d-xo.html and tell me you wouldn't want to it printed large with every little detail intact! People have their reasons, and if I was a photographer, I'd want it to print large and have you able to walk up and see all the crisp detail. I think I've found my answer here, which I remember reading in art school, I remember the book saying, 300dpi for magazines and books, 600dpi up to 1200dpi for fine art reproduction. I never understood why that was the only place I saw that and from then on I just hear internet dudes tell me the eye can't see past 300dpi.
You did NOT mention viewing distance when discussing the "ideal" resolution of your source image. Imagine looking at a 6 foot x 4 foot poster print situated 10 feet away from you. This image will look perfect to the viewer even when printed from a file that is only 100 ppi.
Likewise, a 16" x 20" print that is viewed from 3 feet away, will look great even when printed from an image file that is only 200 ppi.
For a small 6" x 4" print, that will be viewed from less than a foot away, it can look better when printed from a 300 ppi file compared to a 200 ppi file. Notice that I said "it can look better," rather than saying "it will look better." That's because many people (especially those over 50 years of age) do not have perfect eyesight. So, they will not be able to see any difference between the prints created from the 200 ppi file versus the 300 ppi file.
The vast majority of people will not be able to perceive any improvement in a printed image made from a file that is greater than 300 ppi, even upon very close inspection.
In my opinion, making prints from 600 ppi, 700 ppi, 800 ppi, or 900 ppi files is just plain silly.
You can get away with lower resolution on large prints, but prints look better if you have more resolution. And how much more amazing is that 6x4 foot photo when you can walk a few feet from it and pick out the hairs on a elk, or the small type on a sign, and the many other details photography can record. I've done the test to prove it to myself, and have shown them to very experienced photographers who can tell the difference. Does it make a difference, yes. Does it matter to you? Only the photographer can decide this for themselves.
NIce video. You say DPI. Don'r you mea PPI. DPI is for the printer and PPI is the picture
Professionals have used the terms DPI and PPI interchangeably for years to mean the same thing. For example, the Barnes & Noble Press self publishing service specification guide specifies image resolution as "DPI". It is important that new photographers know of this longstanding convention to communicate with designers, offset printing services, and professional photographers.
I'm struggling to understand the difference between dpi and ppi and have watched a few vids on the subject.
Yours confuses me for the opposite reason. You say you were surprised at the increasing quality as you upped the dpi count. Surely that's exactly what to expect.
Hi Choo...Let me answer your two questions. First PPI is pixels per inch, which is a measure how many pixels from your file will be used to make one inch of output. Technically DPI is the number of dots a printing device can produce, as the ways printers produce an image is different than the way a printer does. In the professional photography and graphic design world, PPI and DPI have been used interchangeably when talking about file resolution, even though dots are not pixels and the internet loves to be pedantic about that. I am using DPI to mean PPI in this video. Second question, all printing devices have a limit on how much file resolution or "PPI" is useful. Giving more PPI to a device will not always equal more print resolution or more detail in the print. Many people have said that you only need to give a inkjet printer 300ppi, or even 240 or 200ppi for "great" results. This video puts that to the test and shows that with inkjet printers, you can give them a lot more PPI than common wisdom suggests and it will give you better results than "industry standard."
i would say 1200dpi is the best and i have it
The dpi vs ppi has been commented on already. I just want to add a little even if the videos is a bit old.
Dpi and ppi is not interchangeable and will never be. They are to completely different things and should not be confused. Yes, it has been used wrong for years, so it is up to us to correct it.
Dpi is completely irrelevant for anyone else than the guy that programs the printer driver for inkjet printers. All normal people will just use ppi. 😉 Adobe has this correct. Affinity has it wrong. Also changing ppi does not change the size of the file.
Thanks for your comment Svein. I've been working in the professional photography world for three decades, and in all that time, dpi and ppi have been used interchangeable by photographers and the graphic arts side we work with and somehow it all worked out just fine. Specs from offset printing firms defined files in dpi, and we all knew what it meant when we prepped our files in Photoshop. Graphic designers and printing services still spec files in dpi. Check out the printing specs for GotPrint.com postcards at www.gotprint.com/products/postcards/order.html?fid=11404054 they specify 350 DPI. Going to take a whole lot of momentum to change the language of a whole professional industry, and not the most important battle IMO.
@@richseiling Oh, I am old enough to know all this 😉 But I also teach, and so do you. We owe it to our students to use the correct terminology, and if anything changes during our lifetime, we need to adapt. Just because people still use the wrong terms does not make it right. Same with the people that talk about compression on a tele, not realizing it is a myth and all lenses has the same "compression", just different magnification.
@@richseiling The easiest way to explain how different dpi and ppi is, it to think about a printer with only black ink. If dpi and ppi was the same, you would only get two tones. Completely black and completely white. No greys.
For each pixel, the inkjet prints an unknown mumber of dots based on the color density. So we actually have no idea what the dpi is. The only thing we can decide is how many pixels from our image that will be printed pr inch.
@@SveinWisnaes Well I thought I covered that in my video description ;) But adapting goes both ways. People new to the art need to understand the conventions used before them as well so they can interact with print houses. Arguing DPI vs PPI always seems pedantic....students are struggling with far more immediate issues in my experience.
Ummm sorry, I am obtuse and wildly afield here.. but someone please elucidate not just what DPI stands for but what it means in its science, thank you, tomodachi.
dots per inch
@@andreimadalin2526 ahhhh that is crazy, thanks
600 DPI is the best.
Every time you referred to "DPI" you actually meant to say "PPI."
Professionals have long used the two interchangeably. Read the video description for a further explanation.
@@richseiling It's unfortunate that "professionals" are content with using incorrect terminology. I'm glad that Adobe doesn't use the term DPI in their imaging-sizing dialog boxes. They use the correct term, which is PPI.
However, even Adobe slipped up in one of their dialog boxes in Photoshop Elements 2024. In their "Process Multiple Files" dialog box, Adobe has accidentally used DPI when referring to resizing images. OUCH!
So I disliked this video because I did not see the “how to do it”…
Well how you set image resolution is different in every application. Even Photoshop and Lightroom deal with this differently. I didn't set out to show you were to adjust it, just want to use when you get to that step.
For how to do it, see this video: th-cam.com/video/Dwx-5gv-v3E/w-d-xo.html