Largest prints you have made with the M8

E

eleskin

Well-known
Local time
3:00 PM
Joined
Feb 5, 2008
Messages
1,080
The largest I have gone is 17"x22" on my Epson 3800. I have read more than a few comments online stating that although the M8 is 10MP, the files are of such high quality, that they can be upsized without too much image quality suffering. That the true Megapixel signature of the M8 is closer to 14MP.

So those of you out there who are still using their trusty M8's, how well have your files held up with extreme enlargements, and how does this affect your opinion of the M9?
 
largest in the house right now

largest in the house right now

is an 11x14, framed from a hand held M8 shot. Most folks think it was with an 8x10 LF or I bought it from a gallery or something.

However, I'm very positive I can go much larger. We have a 2ft x 3 ft. poster, that originated from a 7MP p&s, and it is razor sharp.

eleskin said:
The largest I have gone is 17"x22" on my Epson 3800. I have read more than a few comments online stating that although the M8 is 10MP, the files are of such high quality, that they can be upsized without too much image quality suffering. That the true Megapixel signature of the M8 is closer to 14MP.

So those of you out there who are still using their trusty M8's, how well have your files held up with extreme enlargements, and how does this affect your opinion of the M9?
Click to expand...
 
11x14 and 11x17. They are excellent at this size. I imagine you could go larger. I have been sending mine out for printing (to Nations Photo Lab). Their prints are good, but I'm tempted to take the plunge to get my own printer, so I can really nail the prints the way I want.
 
16x24 B&W via mpix.
Looks great.. could probably even go a bit larger.

Wasn't as happy with color at same size, but that might have been my post processing, the images themselves, or mpix color printing.
 
ampguy said:
is an 11x14, framed from a hand held M8 shot. Most folks think it was with an 8x10 LF or I bought it from a gallery or something.

However, I'm very positive I can go much larger. We have a 2ft x 3 ft. poster, that originated from a 7MP p&s, and it is razor sharp.
Click to expand...

8x10 large format? Are you kidding? The M8 makes a lovely file but it's not even close to 8x10, let alone 4x5 or even 6x7. Maybe close to 6x6 up to an 8x12 print assuming you shot 400 speed film in the 6x6 camera.

The funny thing about Leica that photographers always knew is that it never mattered how good their lenses were...you could just spend a grand on a Bronica system and do better. Of course Bronica's don't look as nice on the leather seats in a Mercedes.

8x10 cannot be replicated by even the highest megapixel backs. It's the raw size of the film and the length of the lenses.
 
40x60's (inch). The smallest print I have in my studio is 30x40. They're tack sharp and have no artifacts.
 
tmfabian: Would love to see what you used for large prints

tmfabian: Would love to see what you used for large prints

I would love to see the files you used for those 40"x60" prints! Post some information on the ISO settings you used, software, etc,,,. That is a very impressive size and speaks well as to what the M8 is capable of.
 
eleskin said:
I would love to see the files you used for those 40"x60" prints! Post some information on the ISO settings you used, software, etc,,,. That is a very impressive size and speaks well as to what the M8 is capable of.
Click to expand...

Honestly, I think it speaks well about the lab I use. They have a graphics person whose sole purpose it is to tweak the files so that they look good no matter what size file I send them. As far as ISO settings...they range from 100 to 1250, but once again...all credit goes to my lab because their graphics person does some voodoo magic with the files...the ISO 1250 was mainly a test to see how the noise would show up at a large print size, and it's just barely noticeable when you stand around 6 inches to a foot away...at standard viewing distance, the noise is not noticeable in any meaningful way.
 
I recently won a prize draw for the Brighton Photo Biennial, part of which is a 42-inch print of one of my photos printed by Martin Parr's printer.* I collect it this Saturday, when I'm given a tour of the print studio.

[* The rest of the prize is a signed Martin Parr photobook, an invite to all the private views, and to the private party afterwards (with Martin Parr and Alec Soth), and being put on the guest list for free entry to all Biennial events this weekend! :cool:]

I chose an M8 photo to print (below) - I'll let you know how it looks! :D

Usually, I print on A3+ size paper (about 18 inches, for those using antique measurements!) for exhibitions, and Leica M8 files are fine at the size. However, prints much larger than that need interpolation - my agency requires 50 MB TIFF files (~18 MP), which M8 files can just about handle: there's minor softening and artefacts when viewed at 100% on screen, but these won't be visible when printed. My agency is happy with interpolated M8 files, but has rejected some interpolated Canon 5D images on technical grounds (the 5D has 12 MP) - I guess when you're almost doubling the image size, the M8's better resolution because of its lack of an anti-aliasing filter just tips the balance...

If anyone's interested in seeing 100% crops of straight and interpolated M8 images, see this post of mine: http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1074925&postcount=34 Yes, there is some minor - but acceptable - artefacting, but bear in mind that this is at screen resolution (about 96 ppi), whereas prints are typically 180-300 dpi, so the interpolated image will end up as a print half to a third the on-screen size.

Incidentally, the 50 MB TIFF requirement hasn't been plucked from thin air, but is based on requirements for ideal reproduction of photographs by the publishing industry. As mentioned, 50 MB approximates 18 MP, and this allows someone with perfect 20:20 vision looking at the printed image to perceive it as perfectly sharp, regardless of the printed size (from a book up to a huge billboard poster), providing the person is standing at a normal viewing distance (which will increase the larger the print - no one looks at a poster from 15 cm!). More info on this topic here: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica...30720-m9-faq-sticky-thread-2.html#post1415787 (By the way, I've worked in publishing for decades, so I knew all about this well before digital cameras came out, as I had to process scans.)

Deaths Head Hawkmoth
4378430641_191ec9de6f_z.jpg
 
I have a gallery full of 24x36 inch canvas wraps all shot with my M8 and printed on my 9800s. I have printed 40x60s and have also done a window display consisting of 3 36x72 backlit prints from a single M8 shot. IQ is great from the sidewalk, which is what the window display was designed for.

But, even though I can print big, I like M8 files printed at 16x24 and 13x19.

Tom
 
I had a 11x17 Lightjet made from a heavily cropped image I shot @ 2500iso, it's grainy to begin with but artifacts are tolerable. From all the above responses, I'm not afraid to print anything from the camera!

Rick, the moth image is great BTW! I love the texture of the metal background and wood plank.
 
RichC said:
I recently won a prize draw for the Brighton Photo Biennial, part of which is a 42-inch print [...] I'll let you know how it looks!

[see above for photo]
Click to expand...

Picked up my 42" print today, and I'm stunned by the quality: pin sharp, no artefacts or softening to speak of. Granted, this was carefully printed for me on a top-end £6500 HP Designjet Z3200 by a master printer (Martin Parr's printer), but it shows what a good 10 MP camera is capable of...

He agreed with me that, in practice, files from a ~20 MP camera will produce exhibition-quality prints at any size without visible loss in quality, provided they're seen at a normal viewing distance (i.e. the larger the print, the further back you stand). (My moth photo was carefully resampled to the equivalent of 20 MP before printing.)

As a bonus, Martin Parr popped into the print studio to say "hi" and inscribed one of his photobooks to me... :cool:
 
I print selected photos first to A5, which end in small portfolio collections, which I maintain, to show. these are used by me basically as proofs and I adjust printing, development and touch ups after seeing them in Lightroom.

The ones, I want to hang or give away, I then print at A3+ (13x19).
There have been no files from the M8.2 so far, that showed issues with aliasing or artifacts in 13x19.
The biggest, I have printed so far were very heavy crops (about 1/3 of the frame) of 135mm telephoto shots with the M8.2 at LeMans. These have been printed also on 13x19 and look great, as long, as panning was good.

I am very, very happy with M8 files. This is one reason, I do not seriously consider the M9 an upgrade for me (I am not into wide angle, 35mm + is nice for me).
If the M9 would have a higher pixel count, making cropped files (motor sport) even more detailed, while retaining, or better, improving on high ISO, would it be a real revelation for me.
 
24x36 for an exhibit and when I compared it to some same size prints from my 5D days it reminded me why I prefer Leica
 
40x60 inch

40x60 inch

40 x 60 inch outstanding quality. Very little post processing.

Image holds up at 40 x 60 as it does in the test prints (11 x14 inch).
40 X 60 inch print looks great when viewed from 6 feet away or from 6 inches!!! Colors are impressive!

I'm impressed with the M8 !




but, you (may) know the old saying as I heard it.
... "if ya can't do it good ... do it big !
... If ya can't do it good and big
.... do it big and in color " ...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom