There are some images that seem to cry out to be displayed as a large sized print. Skyscrapers and mountains come to mind. However, it has also been said, and I am paraphrasing as I can’t seem to remember to whom the quote should be attributed, that “if you can’t take a great image at least print it big and maybe no one will notice”.
"Three Trees"Copyright Howard Grill
Recently, I made an interesting discovery when I was working with this image. I wasn’t really sure how it would look as a print. Evaluating it on the computer monitor, as you are now, I thought it was, well, so-so. Certainly pleasant enough to look at, but really nothing special. I didn’t simply pass it by at the time because I had been considering including it in the project that came about from my New Year’s resolution (see Part 2 of my Jan 21st blog entry). For this reason, I decided to see what it would look like when printed at the same size as the other images in that group, which are matted to 22 x 28 inches.
My purpose is not to wax on about what a great image I can produce. On the contrary, as a small image I think it is fairly bland. I do, however, find it quite interesting that the photograph takes on a very different quality when printed large, and I don’t think that quality is merely related to the ‘wow’ effect of seeing a large print in the way that the opening quote suggests. Rather, the large size of the print was able to bring out an aspect of the image that could not be previously recognized or appreciated.
I am in no way suggesting that one should take mediocre images and blow them up as a method of improving them. On the other hand, it just might be that some images don’t reach their full potential until seen in a large format presentation.
3 comments:
I have had similar experiences, particularly with landscapes. It is just hard to get absorbed into a small print, or a grand landscape displayed on most typical size monitors. It can be a tremendous disadvantage to communicating the true feeling of an image on the web.
And, I have to believe that during the editing process, so many people experience frustration in that the image they are editing at home doesn't quite live up to the exhilaration they had when snapping the shutter. Perhaps it is just the size they are viewing it at. This is one of the reasons why I love my 23 inch widescreen LCD monitor. Images just look so much more like I experienced them vs. when I was editing on a 19 inch.
The only problem is - you can only create so many large prints and then what to do with them!
On the other hand... I often find that really small prints, say 3x4 or 4x5 or so can be very effective at drawing a viewer in to the image. It's especially helpful if you put the photograph in a giant mat.
I think it's one of the "big deal" problems with the digital world... seeing these images on the monitor doesn't really mirror what it's like to have a print in your hand... or... more so.... on the wall.
On the other other hand, there is something remarkable about the fact that we can now make very large prints a whole lot more easily and economically than we ever have been able to before.
Nice post... size matters... love it!
-Jeff Curto
Thanks Jeff, sometimes my slightly warped sense of humor slips in :>)
I do find the idea of very small prints intriguing. I have seen some (and have seen some small paintings presented this way as well) with the big mats which grab and focus your attention and make you want to see what is 'so important' at the center. It might be a nice way to present abstracts?
Post a Comment