Medium Format Forum

Register a free account now!

If you are registered, you get access to the members only section, can participate in the buy & sell second hand forum and last but not least you can reserve your preferred username before someone else takes it.

Framing 6x6 options How big do you go



For all you 6x6 shooters. I'm thinking about purchasing a epson 2400 and was trying to figure out if it would allow me large enough prints. I guess anything past 12.5x12.5 would require too much wall space. However, I wanted to get opinions from other users what size you normally enlarge your prints?

What size of square prints are the norm for galleries etc.?
Kellmeister, I can't answer that question, so will leave it to experts.

However, I will tell you that I shot some images of a house for a real estate agent recently (no I am not a pro) using my CF 50mm FLE. They produced a street board with one image enlarged to 8 feet x 10 feet! I stood right next to it and there was virtually NO bitmapping; the finest details were dead SHARP all over the uncropped image. The agent said he has never had an image quality like it in his 25 years of selling houses.
...and have you looked into both Epson and Canon's latest versions of their flatbed scanners - 4800dpi? Both provide masks for all 120 formats and 4x5 as well. Strikes me as the ideal DIY non-pro MF/LF scanners.
I assume that you just try to joke around a bit . ok , nice to have some fun , but i can not believe that a HASSI negative is blown up to 8x10 feet and still has the quality you describe .
On my "want to buy list" i have on position 1 an
IMACON FLEXTIGHT 646 or even 848 scanner and i believe , that scans , based on an asa100 film and using one of these scanners will not produce quality images of the size you mention . Just unbelieveable .
Jurgen, me too! You should have seen my face when I was shown the board and walked up to it and noticed a lens cap fitting on a terrace - so small it would be hardly noticeable on an 8x8 inch print!

I am not experienced in how they make these poster boards and the "technology" involved in scanning the negative, but that is what I saw and interestingly it made the agent's eyes pop out too!

When I comment that there was hardly any bitmapping, that was true - yes there was visible bitmapping naturally enough. But, it was so good, I could stand with my face inches from the board and clearly make out fine leaves and very fine plants in the foreground and background! It was NOT like looking at a puzzle that required you to stand back.

Then he showed me digi images (35mm format DSLR type taken by a pro and they looked just horrible in comparison - soft, mushy, poor definition of edges etc - simply because the imaging device could not resolve sufficiently.

This guy is the owner of a prestigious real estate firm that handles the most expensive residences in our state. He said "I know this is a hobby, but can you do my properties regularly? You can do all of them if you like?" and he was serious.

So, maybe others here can tell you what scanning and print technologies are used.

What I do know is that big bill-boards in the past achieved super quality images frm pros using 4x5 equipment - so maybe the connection is in the neg size too.

Oh, by the way the film I used was plain old Fuji Superia 100ASA! In my view it is a very underrated film.
Hi all. The way that such large images can be reproduced is by scanning them at max resolution, then running them through a loss-less interpolation program like Genuine Fractals. This program is designed to make massive enlargements by converting the scan into a loss-less Fractal file which then can be taken up to incredible sizes. We have 10' posters in our ad agency that were made from files that were under 50 meg. The detail is unbelievable ... but you have to start with a rock steady, perfectly focused image in the first place.
Hi Marc
who sells Genuine Fractals - it sounds like it could be a life saver for me (I am in publishing)
best Ruben
The questions about picture size... I print a lot of my hassie stuff to 11x11" and either make my own 20x20" frames out of poplar wood, or buy the cheap ikea square frames around the same size. I always cut my own mattes. I've printed shots up to about 30"x40", but that's a rare occassion. Those are very hard to matte and frame...
by the way, normal isn't a word you can use when asking about gallery prints. There are tons of different sizes used in galleries all over the world. I've seen big 6'x6' prints in a london gallery and small 10"x10" prints too. I'd say a print somewhere between 16" and 20" would be a good gallery size, as many photogs print there non-square negs to 16x20" size. So why not do a 16"x16" print?!?

The reason I do an 11x11" print is because the fuji frontier will do them cheap on regular wet-process paper. I think these and similar machines will do up to 13" or 14" wide...

I use Pro-Lab in Pompano Beach Florida for develping and printing, starting with all frames being printed to 5"x5", then selecting which ones to be made larger 12" x 12", the next step is for larger prints.

Framing is customm using special designed reinforced corners.



2651 East Atlantic Blvd
Pompano Beach Florida 33062
I think the enlargement factor depends very much on what film you used . So if i was using a 400 ASA film i do not enlarge more than up to 10x10 inches at a maximum . You will defenately loose quality if enlarging more than that . But with 200ASA or even 100ASA you can use a factor more than 5 . (without loosing quality) . if you dont mind the grain , then go ahead and blow up as far as you want .
When I enlarge up to 20"x30" prints from 35mm film, It looks grainy if you get right up on the print, but these sized prints are supposed to be viewed from a few feet away or more. And if you want a HUGE print that you can look at from inches away and still see details, try shooting 8x10 film...