nightfly
Well-known
I was inspired by this:
And was wondering what it would take to do something similiar.
The photo is by Richard Misrach and I assume is large format to start with.
Will probably use a 6 x 7 from a Mamiya 7 as my source image since that's what I've got.
Just wondering if anyone has experience doing something like this and has any ideas.
And was wondering what it would take to do something similiar.
The photo is by Richard Misrach and I assume is large format to start with.
Will probably use a 6 x 7 from a Mamiya 7 as my source image since that's what I've got.
Just wondering if anyone has experience doing something like this and has any ideas.
zuiko85
Veteran
Do a google search for digital murals?
Haven't tried it but it might work.
Haven't tried it but it might work.
CliveC
Well-known
Digitally, a wide format printer will do it. Just provide the scanned file to your local display graphics printer. Resolution depends wholly on the quality of the printer. A lot of large format printing isn't meant to be looked at up close.
Optically, you can rotate your enlarger so that it casts on a wall, where you put your photo paper. I assume you would need specialized equipment to run chemicals through it, possibly some kind of roll developing system.
Optically, you can rotate your enlarger so that it casts on a wall, where you put your photo paper. I assume you would need specialized equipment to run chemicals through it, possibly some kind of roll developing system.
Tinchohs
Member
I saw Richard Misrach's work at Look3 Photo Festival last year. My understanding is that he prints himself on 44 wide printers. Some of the larger work I saw exhibited was made up of several prints physically 'stitched' together. Not sure if this is how he usually address his large or mar printing, but for sure was what he showed in Charlottesville.
Frank Petronio
Well-known
He starts from 8x10. Gursky used 5x7, then the largest Phase back. Many of the other famous big landscapists use 4x5, although there is an Italian that shoots 11x14 Portra.
You can scan your film and get the local graphics shop to run a large inkjet for $100. It will be the Walmart equivalent of a snapshot print.
Check out the largeformatphotography.info forum or the getdpi.com forums to get pointed in the right direction. To do it right means a proper drum scan ($100-plus), image prep time, and a custom inkjet print and mounting. Figure a good 30x40 will cost $200 for basic output and mounting/framing 1x to 5x depending on complexity.
You can print a small file to giant size and it will look fine if you stand far enough away. Takes experience/judgement and enough sense to understand the compromises of the format and budget. You can always print a small section of a large enlargement to proof how the image holds up.
You can scan your film and get the local graphics shop to run a large inkjet for $100. It will be the Walmart equivalent of a snapshot print.
Check out the largeformatphotography.info forum or the getdpi.com forums to get pointed in the right direction. To do it right means a proper drum scan ($100-plus), image prep time, and a custom inkjet print and mounting. Figure a good 30x40 will cost $200 for basic output and mounting/framing 1x to 5x depending on complexity.
You can print a small file to giant size and it will look fine if you stand far enough away. Takes experience/judgement and enough sense to understand the compromises of the format and budget. You can always print a small section of a large enlargement to proof how the image holds up.
dogbunny
Registered Boozer
There are also companies that will print your photos to wallpaper. You then just applying it like normal wallpaper. It looked decent in pictures (TV, Internet) I've seen, but I've never seen one in the flesh.
db
db
nightfly
Well-known
Thanks for the tips. Didn't mean to post this in the analog printing forum was definitely thinking it would be some sort of digital print.
Will start poking around and see what I can find. Am looking to do something very much like that original one I posted, a sort of wallpaper. Probably not a lot of detail going to use it more for the graphic impact and color rather than fine detail but don't want something that looks like mush and want to preserve the subtle gradation of medium format film
Will start poking around and see what I can find. Am looking to do something very much like that original one I posted, a sort of wallpaper. Probably not a lot of detail going to use it more for the graphic impact and color rather than fine detail but don't want something that looks like mush and want to preserve the subtle gradation of medium format film
Harry Caul
Well-known
After you have your scanned neg you might using something like Alien Skin Blow Up to create a suitable print resolution.
http://www.alienskin.com/BlowUp/blowup_examples.aspx
http://www.alienskin.com/BlowUp/blowup_examples.aspx
noisycheese
Normal(ish) Human
How big are we talking? 2x3 feet? 4x6 feet? 5x7 feet? 8x10 feet? 11x14 feet?
DamenS
Well-known
How big are we talking? 2x3 feet? 4x6 feet? 5x7 feet? 8x10 feet? 11x14 feet?
Most walls should be larger than the lowest three of these options.
nightfly
Well-known
Probably about 4 x 6 feet
Moto-Uno
Moto-Uno
This may ( or may not ) be relevant , but a couple of years ago I had 24"x 30"
enlargements made from a 4x5 delta 100 negative and I had to get up to the print
with an 8x loupe to start to see grain, not visible to the bare eye at 10". I too have a
Mamiya 7 and don't doubt that at the size you mention it can probably hold it's own,
(tripod,slow film, etc). Peter
enlargements made from a 4x5 delta 100 negative and I had to get up to the print
with an 8x loupe to start to see grain, not visible to the bare eye at 10". I too have a
Mamiya 7 and don't doubt that at the size you mention it can probably hold it's own,
(tripod,slow film, etc). Peter
Particular
a.k.a. CNNY, disassembler
Check out whitewall.
They have an option called "Latex print with adhesive film", that is designed to be stuck on walls. It claims to be hard wearing enough for living areas. The print quality will not be as nice as any of the photo papers, but you will have the size impact. There must be other printers that offer similar products.
They have an option called "Latex print with adhesive film", that is designed to be stuck on walls. It claims to be hard wearing enough for living areas. The print quality will not be as nice as any of the photo papers, but you will have the size impact. There must be other printers that offer similar products.
vdonovan
Vince Donovan
We do a lot of 4' x 6' prints. We have them done at a commercial sign printer, which is cheaper than a fine-art photo print shop. They do a great job and the prints look fine.
Moto-Uno
Moto-Uno
^ So, what kinda price would these people you spoke of charge for his size print,in colour?
Peter
Peter
CliveC
Well-known
My local trade printer can do roll canvas 4'x6' for about $70. Poster print the same size for about $50. They can do up to 4'x8'. Not art printer quality, but from a distance, it would be hard to tell.
Dwig
Well-known
I print for an art photographer here in Key West. We regularly print images in the 30x45" to 40x60" range with the occasional print 48x72" to 96x144". We use an Imacon scanner to scan 35mm transparencies. Most work is printed in-house on 44" Epson printers. For the larger work we work with services on the mainland where there is room for larger printers.
The biggest "trick" is cleaning up the scans and "massaging" the upsampled file to clean all of the magnified flaws in the film (if a scan) and those produced by the upsampling (whether scanned film or originally a digital image). We do quite well with PS's upsampling of either the scanned transparencies or the digital files (Nikon D800 usually). We always upsample ourselves, even when outsourcing the actual printing, making an upsampled file for each print size. We never rely on the print software (when printing in-house) or the printing service (when jobbing out the print work) to do the upsampling.
The biggest "trick" is cleaning up the scans and "massaging" the upsampled file to clean all of the magnified flaws in the film (if a scan) and those produced by the upsampling (whether scanned film or originally a digital image). We do quite well with PS's upsampling of either the scanned transparencies or the digital files (Nikon D800 usually). We always upsample ourselves, even when outsourcing the actual printing, making an upsampled file for each print size. We never rely on the print software (when printing in-house) or the printing service (when jobbing out the print work) to do the upsampling.
Vics
Veteran
I wish you could see David Hockney's "A Bigger Exhibition." He sets up a huge rack (grid) with maybe nine cameras equidistant apart (3 rows x 3 columns) and shoots them all off at once. The 9 viewpoints don't match perfectly at all, as you can imagine. The 4 sq. ft prints are then mounted edge to edge so you have a 12 sq ft picture (mostly forest landscapes) with something eerily wrong with it, what with the tree branches not matching and all. Some are bigger than this, and some are VIDEO (cameras mounted on a slow-moving car), which is mesmerizing!
MarinB
Member
6x7 format enlarges pretty well to 4x6 feet.
You will need either a Rodagon-G 105mm or a G-Componon 100mm for a really good result. Some other process lenses may work, but these two will yield both the shortest possible printing time and excellent sharpness.
C-prints can be self-developed in large drums, i.e. irrigation pipes. Find a 16-inch diameter pipe that isn't too heavy. Those made of PVC don't weigh that much, but probably need to be epoxied + polyurethanized to prevent chemical contamination. Then you need caps, and a way to get the developer onto the paper as quick as possible without getting too much fumes into your lungs. Forget trays for RA-4, except for really small prints. A special cap design worked for me, though the largest I got to was 32x50". Beseler 16x20" drums use a trough for chemicals, which may be the best solution.
This is all assuming you want to do it all analogue-way abut don't have access to an RA-4 processor. If inkjet works for you, get your 6x7 film drum scanned properly, at actual optical 6000 dpi or larger resolution.
You will need either a Rodagon-G 105mm or a G-Componon 100mm for a really good result. Some other process lenses may work, but these two will yield both the shortest possible printing time and excellent sharpness.
C-prints can be self-developed in large drums, i.e. irrigation pipes. Find a 16-inch diameter pipe that isn't too heavy. Those made of PVC don't weigh that much, but probably need to be epoxied + polyurethanized to prevent chemical contamination. Then you need caps, and a way to get the developer onto the paper as quick as possible without getting too much fumes into your lungs. Forget trays for RA-4, except for really small prints. A special cap design worked for me, though the largest I got to was 32x50". Beseler 16x20" drums use a trough for chemicals, which may be the best solution.
This is all assuming you want to do it all analogue-way abut don't have access to an RA-4 processor. If inkjet works for you, get your 6x7 film drum scanned properly, at actual optical 6000 dpi or larger resolution.