What setting do I need on my Camera (DSLR) to take a photo and blow it up to Poster size [24x36] ?

Factual Questions
1

I have a new toy - the Nikon D-3000 - basically, it’s the camera in between the D-60 and D-90, it’s no D-200 but it takes amazing photos nonetheless.

I figure if I shoot in NEF (RAW) or highest quality, the photo will hold it’s crispness up to a 24x36 poster size. Is that right? Is there another setting I need to adjust?

You may be able to detect I don’t know the common nomenclature for taking such photo’s but I do wish to learn and in the mean time decorate the house with some of the stunning scenery of the Rockies.

2

Shooting RAW doesn’t give you any more pixels than shooting highest quality JPG, and, in general, won’t give you a better image for poster sized printing. It will allow you to do a better job adjusting exposure and color correction. But assuming you frame your shot correctly and have the exposure correct either will be more than enough for a reasonable poster sized print.

3

A while back I created a movie-sized poster for my father. I used a built in Photoshop tool that takes in a number of photos and creates the poster for you out of all those photos. The resolution of the resulting image was very large. Something like 4000 x 10000. I saved the file, took it to Kinkos and they were able to create the poster for me.

What I’m trying to say is that the higher the resolution the better the poster will come out.

4

Expose correctly, make sure it’s sharp, shoot at 100 ISO if you can (which looks to be the Nikon D3000’s base ISO setting. Often, the base ISO is 200, but not on this camera.) Otherwise, use the lowest ISO setting you can that does not cause motion blur from camera shake. Shoot in raw or the highest quality JPEG. (I personally see no reason not to shoot raw these days with the cheapness of memory and the utilities available for managing large catalogs of images. It will give you a lot more flexibility.)

A 10.2 MP file will blow up to 24"x36" relatively okay. There will be interpolation involved: a 300 dpi print of that size is just slightly bigger than an 8"x12". But there shouldn’t be an issue. At a normal viewing distance for something this size, it won’t be noticeable. But if you get in real close and look at it, you’ll be able to see there’s some interpolating going on. I’ve seen 20"x30" blow-ups of 2.74MP files from the old Nikon D1, and they looked acceptable, when put into the hands of somebody who knows how to print. Among other things, making a good print generally involves applying a lot more sharpening in post than you think looks right on the screen. This requires a little experience or a good print shop to do it for you.

5

So the D3000’s resolution is 3,872 × 2,592; which, for a 24"x36" poster, works out to 108 dpi.

6

Thank everyone - looks like exposure is key and if I shoot raw at 100 ISO I ought to be just fine. The necessity for having a good printer is not lost on me, luckily I have a fantastic printer right down the road.

7

You do realize that your printer will not be able to work with a RAW file; you’ll need to convert it to TIFF or JPEG for a commercial lab to print from.

Which means you’ll need some sort of RAW converting software, which, IIRC, Nikon does not include with the camera, though the latest versions of Photoshop does.

8

That’s probably true for his printer, but not necessarily so. There are a good number of printers out there who accept RAW files. They will charge you extra for it, but they can do it.

9

I have InDesign that I can convert the file from. I think…Though I ought to change it to a TIFF first right? Then I can bring it to the Printer?

10

It is always easier to shrink than blow up. Go maximum megapixel you got and shrink down

11

Ken Rockwell’s guide to the D3000.

12

You’re not going to be shrinking down for that size print at 10.2 MP.

And take Ken Rockwell with a rather large grain of salt. In fact, generally do the exact opposite of what he says.

13

I would actually download a trial copy of Photoshop or Lightroom in a pinch. I don’t remember whether InDesign will give you the full ACR controls when converting a raw file or whether it just gives you some default conversion.

Otherwise, ask your printer whether they will deal with raw files. If it’s a high-end professional printer, they should be able to do so for an extra charge. If it’s a consumer-level printing service, they most likely will not.

Do you not have any photo editing software? What do you normally use to process your photos? Or do you just go straight to print?

14

There isn’t one magic setting that will allow you to print sharp images at that size. What’s required is a combination of resolution, sharpness, low noise and lack of blur in the image. Don’t get too hung up on the DPI; large images are meant to be viewed from a distance, and don’t need to be printed at the 300 DPI that a smaller image would need to. 108 DPI will be fine for an image meant to be hung on a wall.

Resolution is a good thing to have; the more pixels available to you, the more you can crop your image as you see fit and still have enough resolution to print decent sizes. However, all the resolution in the world will not produce a decent print if the image is misfocussed or lacks sharpness. Unfortunately, some of this sharpness is due to the lens used (in general, more money = better lens) and has nothing to do with the camera settings. Aperture also has an effect on sharpness (more precisely, on depth of field), and for a portrait, you typically want to shoot with a large aperture (small f-number) to isolate your subject from the background. For a landscape where you want as much of the image to be in focus as possible, a small aperture (large f-number) is indicated.

Large aperture used for a portrait (f/2.8): http://anuruddha.smugmug.com/People/Portraits/1256848_Af7Sx#100442228_qmLoi-A-LB

Small aperture used for a landscape (f/10): http://anuruddha.smugmug.com/People/Jersey-2008/Jersey-2008-169/362368089_vo32v-L.jpg

You also need to consider the type of photograph you are taking, to avoid or perhaps create blur for effect. If you want a sharp, frozen in time capture, you need to make sure that your shutter speed is high enough to capture the event. Ideally, the camera should be supported by a tripod to help avoid hand shake. Alternatively, you might want a long exposure for artistic effect, in which case you will almost definitely want a tripod.

Long exposure on a tripod (1/6 s): http://anuruddha.smugmug.com/Street-Scenes/London-Through-a-50/2301793_i48is#120318652_iLX7i-A-LB

Short exposure to freeze runners (1/640 s): http://anuruddha.smugmug.com/People/London-Run-October-2006/IMG7510/100900398_Efbj4-L.jpg

Shooting at the lowest possible ISO will reduce the noise in the image, and improve detail in the print. Artistic “film grain” can always be added later if required. There’s a constant interplay between ISO, aperture and shutter speed that you need to balance to get the right exposure. You want to keep ISO low to avoid noise, but a noisy sharp image is better than a clean blurred one, so if you can’t get a decent shutter speed, you need to up the ISO or open up the aperture. The latter means that you might lose sharpness due to the characteristics of the lens so you might decide that you need a flash…

As you can see, it can be a complex affair! The on-camera settings that I most often change are aperture, ISO and white balance, in that order. I tend to shoot in aperture-priority mode, where I set the aperture and the camera automatically adjusts the shutter speed. If the shutter speed is too low, I open up the aperture a bit or bump the ISO a step higher. I think playing around with these settings will give you a good handle on how to generate sharp images that will print well at large sizes, to be admired by all while hanging on your walls. This turned out much longer than I expected; I hope it’s useful!

15

Very nice post Devorin.

16

Many thanks Devorin, I am looking forward to playing this weekend!