You don't say how big the original image is, but there's very little you can do about pixelation.
If you take a picture made up from little squares and make it bigger, all you get is bigger squares. Eventually the squares get so big you can make then out with the naked eye.
You'll need a higher resolution image.
2007-03-13 02:27:56
·
answer #1
·
answered by mark 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
The simple answer is you can't. There are some software packages around that will help a little - Genuine Fractals for example - but basically all they do is defocus and interpolate the pixel edges. And they are expensive. For the kind of enlargement you need not even high end software will give you a good image - unless it's being viewed from a very long way away. RIP software is only of use with the printer being used and has absolutely nothing to do with the image enlargement - it will enable you to print a postscript image to a non-postscript printer. But a large-format print such as you are seeking would have to go through a large-format inkjet which would already have RIP software or preferable a hardware RIP - Fiery or similar.
2007-03-13 02:32:37
·
answer #2
·
answered by alan p 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
You are going to need more than just a good RIP software, you are going to need a significantly larger image. For a 6ft x4ft image printed at 300 dpi you are going to need at least a 800mb file which is a far cry from 4mb. There is a reason as to why many pro photographers shoot with a 4x5 or 8x10 veiw camera when they are shooting for posters or billboards that call for lots of detail, you need lots of information.
Now on the bright side, when most people view a poster or a billboard they don't stand 1 foot away and stare at the image. They stand perhaps 6 feet or more from the image. So basically you don't need to print the image at 300dpi. If you are familiar with offset lithography you will find a a lot of commercial posters are printed at a low quality of around a linescreen of approximately 85 LPI. For this reason you could get away with printing your images at 72dpi but even at that you are going to need at least a 50mb file for a 6foot by 4foot image. However, you don't need to have a 50mb image because in Photoshop you can interpolate a 20mb 72dpi image to 6 feet and it will look decent for the mere fact that as I said previous, people don't look up close at mural prints or posters. On the other hand, if you want extremely detailed posters then get yourself an 8x10 viewcamera and have your negatives or chromes scanned on a drumscanner and have them printed on a lightjet, thats a combination that will knock your socks off.
2007-03-13 03:47:54
·
answer #3
·
answered by wackywallwalker 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
The picture we wish to view consists of millions of dots (either on a screen or on a page) The resolution of a picture is a definition of how many 'picture elements' (pixels) constitute the image. The larger numbers mean the more elements in a given image.
Enlarging a photo will therefore 'stretch' the elements and those of lesser resolution will 'pixellate' sooner than those of greater resolution.
But I doubt any home-user will be able to enlarge a photograph to 6ft x 4ft
Display pixel size
The size of a display pixel is determined by the screen resolution and diagonal size of the monitor displaying it. Some Examples: Screen Res: 1024x768, Diagonal Size: 19", Pixel size:0.377mm Screen Res: 800x600, Diagonal Size: 17", Pixel size: 0.4318mm Screen Res: 640x480, Diagonal Size: 15", Pixel size:0.4763mm
2007-03-13 06:21:18
·
answer #4
·
answered by Rod Mac 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
with a 4MB image you can probably get a good print of 1mt (3ftx4ft) tops... you can change it to 100 dpi, that way it will get bigger, but you cannot invent pixels, so to change it you click with the right button on the top part of the window, you go to image size and go to the third option. the three possibiliities must be linked, you then change it to 100 dpi.
what you can do to extend it a little, is to add an effect,
make the image larger without modifying the dpi. add the photo grain effect, on 300 dpi, that way it will be more subtle... of try it with other effects.
good luck.
2007-03-13 03:18:15
·
answer #5
·
answered by serhell 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
There is a plug for photoshop... It involves saving it.
Fractal something
2007-03-15 07:45:28
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Try shooting the image again with film... no squares!
2007-03-13 06:07:58
·
answer #7
·
answered by limbo_mute 1
·
0⤊
1⤋
Look closer. ;)
2007-03-13 02:30:02
·
answer #8
·
answered by Joka 3
·
0⤊
0⤋