i usually shot portraits with my 60D and tamron 17-50mm f2.8 using maximum resolution JPEG + RAW @ 5184 x 3456 pixels. after recent photoshoot, i tried to print an 8R using this particular setting and the result were dissapointing in my case (lack of details, seems stretched etc..) i wonder what is the proper way to print a large picture over 16x20" and 20x30"?


  • \$\begingroup\$ How are you getting the photo from your camera to the printer? What application are you using if printing from your computer? \$\endgroup\$
    – Michael C
    Commented Dec 13, 2015 at 4:05
  • \$\begingroup\$ I let some photo printing store to do it for me, and to be frank, speaking about the problem it's gotta be from my end because they have printed many pictures from different photographers and they came out fine. \$\endgroup\$
    – kenlz
    Commented Dec 13, 2015 at 4:40
  • \$\begingroup\$ at the moment im trying to use smillaenlarger to enlarge the picture hoping that it would restore some of the pixels. \$\endgroup\$
    – kenlz
    Commented Dec 13, 2015 at 5:45
  • 5
    \$\begingroup\$ You can't "restore" pixels with software, it will just perform some more or less clever interpolation. Have a look at photo.stackexchange.com/questions/1715/… and photo.stackexchange.com/questions/456/… \$\endgroup\$
    – Olivier
    Commented Dec 13, 2015 at 9:08
  • \$\begingroup\$ To clarify my earlier request: What is the workflow involved between the camera and the printer? Do you just pull the memory card out and give it to the printing house? Do you download to your computer and do some editing first? etc.? \$\endgroup\$
    – Michael C
    Commented Dec 27, 2015 at 7:19

1 Answer 1


lack of details, seems stretched

This does suggest a mistake by the printer, as you are implying the aspect ratio was changed ( or the image distorted ? ) just in the print.

Now it is possible that if you used some online service to do this or a kiosk, that you unintentionally changed a setting to make it ignore the aspect ration and simply fit the print to the page, but if you did not then the printer did it.

it's gotta be from my end because they have printed many pictures from different photographers and they came out fine

This is false reasoning. Even if they'd never made a mistake before, that does not mean they won't ever make a mistake.

  • \$\begingroup\$ I see now that it just knock a little sense into my head. I wonder what if I want to print beyond my megapixels? What if 5184 x 3456 which is equal to 137.16 x 91.44 in cm is to be printed to 200 x 100 cm, obviously it would lose some details/color right? and do you think the materials where the picture is going to be printed on matter? thanks a lot by the way! \$\endgroup\$
    – kenlz
    Commented Dec 14, 2015 at 5:04
  • \$\begingroup\$ You don;t loose detail because it's not there to start with. As a general rule very large prints are viewed from further away and there is no practical problem with resolution. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Dec 14, 2015 at 10:00

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.