video stills for print

[zim]

Has anyone here ever been requested to submit a still for print or needed to print a still from DV? I understand the issues surrounding resolution but was wondering if there were any tricks. The request I received was that I need to supply a 300 ppi image yet video is 72. Is my only option to inflate the image in photoshop? I do understand that this will severely decrease the quality of the image and they want me to do it because they do not want to be held responsible for the quality change. I know that I was in a gallery recently and their were large prints from video but I think it was from film not DV.

 

[ChrisFromCanada]

Take the still from your editor and use the De-interlace filter and scale up to the requested resolution. There is not much else you can do.

 

[Orlando Furioso]

They have us do this in my school ALL the time. It is so annoying. They expect us to take stills from films (being edited by other classes) to create large print quality movie posters.

Try to get an uncompressed still, de-interlaced (as previously mentioned), and increase the resolution in PS. Recently I took a snapshot of my screen with the image displayed over a solid color. I used a 8.2MP camera. You have to be careful not to get moire from your screen. Some blurring/sharpening work in photoshop can get you a decent enough image to work with. It is a messy method, but it produced a workable image.

If you have CS2 I recommend converting your image to a smart object so you can resize/rotate to your hearts content until you finalize your design. If you don't, try having two copies of your image. Resize/position/play around with one. Once you have decided proper size/placement, take your higher res (previously untouched copy), and position/rotate/resize it in one move.

Working with low res. images is such a pain. I wish you luck.

 

[zim]

Thank you, both of you! I had not even considered the de-interlaced filter. I will also try photogrphing the screen, ironically my video contains elements of working with the screen as a subject.

Thanks!

 

[rjphoto]

How big does it need to be printed?

 

[Sdashiki]

ignore previous posts.

Photographing a monitor to get 8.2MP image?

Um I hate to tell you that you cant CREATE detail. The first rule of photography.

If you take a photo of a pixelated image, even from far away so it doesnt appear pixelated, and you enlarge it, ITS STILL PIXELATED!

A DV image is 720x480 @ 72ppi

So, you are quite limited in being able to pull a still and enlarge it at all.

It all depends on HOW BIG you are going, before you wont be able to get away with using a DV still.

Take any image at 640x480 @ 72ppi, increase it to even 150ppi or 1280x960, and it looks terrible.

To make a poster ABOUT something shot on DV, take a real photo, NOT a video still, they are called production stills in the "profession" and are taken AFTER, BEFORE or DURING a video shoot. but not OF the video.

 

[zim]

How big does it need to be printed?

They only said print ready minimum 300 ppi. Scale, width and hight, was never mentioned... I should find this out.

ignore previous posts.

Photographing a monitor to get 8.2MP image?

Um I hate to tell you that you cant CREATE detail. The first rule of photography.

If you take a photo of a pixelated image, even from far away so it doesnt appear pixelated, and you enlarge it, ITS STILL PIXELATED!

A DV image is 720x480 @ 72ppi

So, you are quite limited in being able to pull a still and enlarge it at all.

It all depends on HOW BIG you are going, before you wont be able to get away with using a DV still.

Take any image at 640x480 @ 72ppi, increase it to even 150ppi or 1280x960, and it looks terrible.

To make a poster ABOUT something shot on DV, take a real photo, NOT a video still, they are called production stills in the "profession" and are taken AFTER, BEFORE or DURING a video shoot. but not OF the video.

Good advice. Ironically, my video is in part digital feedback so taking a photo of it would be no different then taking a photo of the film.

 

[rjphoto]

640x480 will yield a nice 2 inch printed image @ 300dpi. I've even pushed it to 5 inches on an Epson printer with acceptable results for a one time DVD cover.

 

[Sdashiki]

I think they were talking movie posters.

Which is at least a 16x20 image.

Print is a HUGE business and with it you need a HUGE image to print.

Even, as is said previous, at 300DPI a 640x480 only does at best a 5 inch image. Which in print is kinda small.

Look at a HUGE banner next time you see one, with a picture on it not just text. Youll see up close its a nasty pixelated/grainy/halftone looking image. Because no one is gonna get a photo to blow up THAT big without a loss of quality.

If you need and i do mean NEED something to look "good, nice, natural" etc, USE A REAL 35MM camera, even a point and shoot is better than the best digital camera you can get your hands on.

A Digicam yields its max Megapixel image, probably topping 2400x3600@150ppi is you are lucky. And you cant increase the ppi without a loss in quality.

A 35mm can be scanned in at any resolution up to 1200ppi and higher, yeilding a HUGE, in terms of file size, image, but one that can be printed at a large size.

 

[rjphoto]

I just re-read the original posters post and couldn't find anything indicating that they need to do a poster size image.

They only said print ready minimum 300 ppi. Scale, width and hight, was never mentioned... I should find this out.

Zim never said exactly what it is going to be used for.

 

[Sdashiki]

i got confused between the OP and

Orlando Furioso They have us do this in my school ALL the time. It is so annoying. They expect us to take stills from films (being edited by other classes) to create large print quality movie posters.