Thank you, Jeff. I have just printed it at 10.5x14 to my
satisfaction. I can't really print larger than that until I get my
new Epson1280 outfitted and profiled with a new ink set that's coming
soon in the mail, but even with that slightly wider carriage, the
largest I can go is about 12" (to maintain a reasonable margin on a
13" paper for matting).
Fortunately, critical focus was on the flora.
After saying the other day that I don't crop photos much, this one is
an exception. I thought there was more impact to have the lowest
ridge run diagonal into the lower left corner, something I just didn't
see when I was shooting with the camera and lens poised on my very
light Velbon tripod on a crumbly slope (fear and duress as limiting
factors), so I had to crop some from the left side and bottom of the
original. I think I only had about 160 ppi for a letter size, which I
then beefed up to 240 to print a version at that size, and then I
up-rezzed again to 240 to print at 10.5 x 14. Sharpening ever so
carefully, I think that's the practical limit, though I wonder whether
the Fred Miranda up-rez plug-in might offer a bit more headroom.
I think you're right. This photo needs to be biggish.
Joel W.
On 4/7/06, Jeff Keller <jrk_om@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Great shot. Having the fall and the trees for scale set against the
> successive background ridges makes the isolated world feeling very alive for
> me. If this image could be blown up to a very large size and keep the flora
> sharp it would be spectacular.
>
> -jeff
>
> ----Original Message Follows----
> From: "Joel Wilcox" <jfwilcox@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> http://myweb.uiowa.edu/jfwilcox/day/day64.html
>
> Joel W.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|