or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Home Entertainment & Theater Builder › Dedicated Theater Design & Construction › DIY Custom-Printed Movie Poster Acoustic Panels - cheap!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

DIY Custom-Printed Movie Poster Acoustic Panels - cheap! - Page 15

post #421 of 1209
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickbuol View Post

Did you order them with resizing like that?

You can't create detail by cranking up the DPI and resizing it. Your end result will be a softer, lower quality image. Not saying that it won't look fine from 5+ feet away, but if you just placed the order, I would cancel it and get higher resolution images. Ask around, someone may already have the ones that you are looking for.

As for more DPI effecting the acoustical aspect... Not even remotely related to each other, so you are fine there.


***EDIT: I went back and re-read some of your previous posts. You said that you went with the Kona because you have lots of text and want it clear, but yet you started with images that were way to small and just blew them up. Your end result will NOT be what you want. Spoonflower also works primarily with 150 DPI. Sending them a file with a higher DPI just means that they are going to drop it to an effective 150dpi anyway, so going higher is just making the file size larger. That is why an image that is a full yard of material (whatever material) at 150 DPI fills the Spoonflower workspace perfectly. The same dimensions in inches at 300 dpi, gets zoomed in and needs to be reduced in order to fit into the Spoonflower work space. Not saying that you *can't* or *shouldn't* got higher than 150 dpi, but I wouldn't use that to make the image bigger. You aren't adding real detail or data and the image will look sub-par when done.

Again, call and cancel. Post the images that you are looking for and I am sure that someone here can help get you ones that are higher resolution WITHOUT being artificially increased in Photoshop. A few more hours of effort will get you a MUCH better result.

OK thanks. I just canceled my order online. It was still in the processing status. I was under the impression that spoonflower prints at a minimum of 150dbi and shows the sample in 150dbi but prints at higher dbi if provided. I figured 300 dbi or more would produce a much better print then the minimum printing of 150dbi.

I thought if I was picking quality posters. I'm not sure how to determine size of original without knowing what the print dbi is set at to begin with it. I read in this thread to choose at least 2000 pixels off of themovieposterdb site. The print dbi that I was changing did not alter the original image information (pixels), I just set the print dbi before resizing figuring that I was just telling spoonflower to print each image in that quality and not altering the actual image. This stuff is over my head. I tried to watch some YouTube videos on resizing. Thought I had it figured out.

I don't really know much about printing either. I realize they say they get good results with their minimum 150dbi but just like my desktop printer prints decent documents at normal, it prints better at best. I understand most Spponflower customers would be happy with 150dbi for a shirt etc. But I was just trying to get the best print for a movie poster.

All the poster I downloaded were already set to 300dbi when I opened them in Photoshp except for the Superman one which was 72dbi but was 47x69 so I reduced that one but changed the resolution to 350dbi. I was just trying to get the highest print dbi that would keep the file under 40MB.

These are the posters that I downloaded.
http://www.movieposterdb.com/poster/f999883c
http://www.movieposterdb.com/poster/4243f899
http://www.movieposterdb.com/poster/63472650
http://www.movieposterdb.com/poster/92d63b34
http://www.movieposterdb.com/poster/09361feb
http://www.movieposterdb.com/poster/4d7c5af3

Thanks for any help you guys can provide!
Edited by Soupy1970 - 10/17/13 at 8:55am
post #422 of 1209
I can help locate higher res images. Google has some good search tools for that.

In a few seconds I found this one, which is just 7.5"x10" at 300 dpi, or basically 15" x 20" at 150 dpi, but is free and not costing "credits" to get. There should be higer resolution ones out there.

http://img687.imageshack.us/img687/6533/spidermantw.jpg
2245x3000 pixels and 300DPI (not dbi by the way)

***EDIT: I am seeing that they offer some higher resolution servers at the site that you are using. Look for the largest versions by pixel size and the language you want and grab those. It will cost a few more credits of course.
Edited by nickbuol - 10/17/13 at 10:12am
post #423 of 1209
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickbuol View Post

I can help locate higher res images. Google has some good search tools for that.

In a few seconds I found this one, but I should be able to find a better quality one yet:

http://img687.imageshack.us/img687/6533/spidermantw.jpg
2245x3000 pixels and 300DPI (not dbi by the way)

The one you just posted is 7.5 x 10. While better then my Spiderman download (which was the worse download I had). Is that fine to blow up to 24 in. x 36 in.? The others I downloaded where somewhere around 3500x5000 pixels and 300dpi. Which I guess were fine then. The Superman one I am worried about because it was set at 72dpi when I opened it in Photoshop but was a larger poster so I am not sure how that effects quality when changing the dpi before making the size smaller in this one poster?

I thought you said I couldn't enlarge a poster that much? 7.5 x 10 i n. isn't much off from my original.

To clarify all the poster except the superman poster was already 300 dpi. I am confused as to why my previous posters are not good enough to enlarge? Maybe I worded something wrong in a earlier post to make you think I was over enlarging them?
post #424 of 1209
I was editing my post as you made your post. I just said that I was able to find comparible ones to what you did, but for free, with a quick google search. That Superman one is 11" x 16.5" at 300 dpi, or 22.5" x 33" at 150 dpi. That one seems like it would be fine. You mentioned in a previous post that you were getting 6" x 9" images for the others. I guess some information was spread out over several posts. That was 300 dpi, so at the minimum dpi needed, you can double that size to 12" x 18", but you mentioned needing 24" wide for just the image, thus needing to artificially double the size of what you had.

For free, and in less than 30 seconds, I found that one that was effectively 15" x 20" for the same Spider Man poster, and I am sure that higher res versions are out there too.

Again, you were concerned about the text, so blowing up what you had (or even what I linked) won't yield high enough resolution. Even if you were printing on a large sheet of paper where you have a solid printing surface, you would have blocky letters.

I just want to see if people here can help you get better source images. Maybe we can't, and maybe you will go back with your images that you had originally ordered, but I just want to see if we can provide some level of improvement for you.

For quality, taking something that is already 300 dpi and then printing it at 150 dpi you can effectively double the output size without losing any data. That is where you get a built in max of 12" x 18" dpi from your 6" x 9" 300 dpi images without losing any data. But that still isn't big enough. You would basically have to drop to 75 dpi to get the size that you want without losing data, but that is below the recommended minimum of 150dpi. So to get your size and minimum dpi with your current files means to double them in size artifically, which means that 50% (HALF) of the data in that image file is just an "average" of the surround pixels, and HALF of the image data is "fuzzy averages" and not crisp and clear.

I would like to see you get something that is at least 18" x 27" at 150dpi so that you only have to blow it up 25%. The difference in quality will be very nice. Something at least 2700x4050 pixels should yield 18" x 27" at 150 dpi. Idealy, we would like 3600x5400 pixels to get you to 24" x 36" at 150 dpi or better WITHOUT having to blow it up in Photoshop.

Of course, who knows if the people posting the images didn't already do that?
post #425 of 1209
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickbuol View Post

I can help locate higher res images. Google has some good search tools for that.

In a few seconds I found this one, which is just 7.5"x10" at 300 dpi, or basically 15" x 20" at 150 dpi, but is free and not costing "credits" to get. There should be higer resolution ones out there.

http://img687.imageshack.us/img687/6533/spidermantw.jpg
2245x3000 pixels and 300DPI (not dbi by the way)

***EDIT: I am seeing that they offer some higher resolution servers at the site that you are using. Look for the largest versions by pixel size and the language you want and grab those. It will cost a few more credits of course.

Nick Buol,
Hope you don't mind if a former Iowan jumps in here?
I see you have had some luck finding suitable higher res images for custom printing. I have what might be an impossible challenge.
Would love to get one of these printed up to a fairly large size, say 50 x 24" , or even 60 x 28" ?



However; after numerous searches of my own; I don't think I will ever find this image with high enough native resolution?
But then again I may not be searching in "all the the right places" biggrin.gif
post #426 of 1209
THAT is an impressive image! Let me do some digging. Might be impossible since that would be around 9000x4200 pixels at 150dpi. You would be looking almost as an original source document for something that big since that is the equivilant to a 37 megapixel image.

Here is another fun one. Not like yours, but at least they are all in their "Bond" vintage (IE: not their current age, good or bad).



***EDIT: I found where you got your 50 Years of Bond image.

Why not ask the creator for a higher resolution one and see if he will let you use it for a few bucks, credit, etc?

http://themadbutcher.deviantart.com/gallery/#/art/Bond-50-50-Years-of-Bond-325753401?_sid=55a3879a
Edited by nickbuol - 10/17/13 at 12:01pm
post #427 of 1209
Quote:
Again, you were concerned about the text, so blowing up what you had (or even what I linked) won't yield high enough resolution. Even if you were printing on a large sheet of paper where you have a solid printing surface, you would have blocky letters.
Quote:

When I mention I was worried about the text was in relation to the Performance Knit possibly being harder to get straight lines for the text when mounting. I picked posters with text only to give it the authentic movie poster look (like the ones in theater entrances). Really I'm just looking for a good print without faded colors. If 150dpi will get me that then I guess I will have to go that route (unless I find better posters).

Thanks for your help! I now know a little more about how pixels correlate to dpi to make up the size. What confused me was watching videos saying you can change the dpi for print before re-sampling the size without losing any pixel information from the original.
post #428 of 1209
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickbuol View Post

THAT is an impressive image! Let me do some digging. Might be impossible since that would be around 9000x4200 pixels at 150dpi. You would be looking almost as an original source document for something that big since that is the equivilant to a 37 megapixel image.

Here is another fun one. Not like yours, but at least they are all in their "Bond" vintage (IE: not their current age, good or bad).



***EDIT: I found where you got your 50 Years of Bond image.

Why not ask the creator for a higher resolution one and see if he will let you use it for a few bucks, credit, etc?

http://themadbutcher.deviantart.com/gallery/#/art/Bond-50-50-Years-of-Bond-325753401?_sid=55a3879a

Nick,
Thanks for this lead; I will see if I can reach him in the interest in working something out!
post #429 of 1209
Quote:
Originally Posted by MuaySteve View Post

I have been coming to this thread for months after initially stumbling upon it. I knew the second I saw those awesome James Bond panels that this was the exactly solution I wanted for my room if I was going to put up panels.

I finally just got my own panels completed and mounted this past week and I couldn't wait to come and make my own contribution after learning so much from everyone else.

This is nice timing for tcc as I'm in Canada as well.

I ordered 4 posters from spoonflower on the Kona fabric. (It looks like they renamed it since this thread was originally started)

I downloaded my posters from movieposterdb.com (About $5 in credits with a pile left over)

I enlarged the posters to 24' x 36" @ 150dpi, the exact external width of my frames.

I added a 4" black border around each image so that I would have enough to wrap around the frame and staple. (Edit: I get a lot of emails about his. I used photoshop and extended the canvas by 4" horizontally and vertically)

I then added them all into one file to upload to spoonflowers site.

4 yrds for somewhere around $70 + $7 shipping all the way to the great white north. (Had them in just over a week right to my mailbox in a tiny little plastic pouch)



For the frames and the insulation I used 2" x1" pine and Roxul Comfort Board IS. I could not for the life of me find OC 703 in my area. The Comfort board is readily available at Home depot for about $50

The frames are 1.5" thick and perfectly match the thickness of the Roxul.

I used a carpenter square, some spring clamps, wood glue and 2" brad nails to make the frames.





Each panel weights about 12lbs, a lot more then I had envisioned. I didn't want to hang it on a single screw in the drywall, and I hate dealing with picture wire (previous bad experiences) and I wanted to have them all hang in a nice even row.

Solution: French Cleats. 3 screws per cleat. I cut the cleats to 20" in length so you can't see them when you look at the panels from the side. They appear to be just floating off the wall.





Bonus: The french cleats give me a 3/4" airspace.

The finished product: (total cost was about $150 CND for 4 panels. And I still have enough roxul to make 2 more.)





Now I just need to get a couch, and I am good to go.

Thank you so much to everyone who contributed to this thread.

Feel free to PM if you ever need further details for your own project.

Can you tell me the size of the original Thor and Iron Man poster you downloaded from movieposterdb.com? Those look to be the same ones I downloaded and the best I could find on the site was Thor @ 2421 x 3588 and Iron Man @ 2032 x 3000 in the US versions.

I did find this Iron Man in the Spain version that looks like it may work OK, Only the website at the bottom in in a different language. http://www.movieposterdb.com/poster/95cb2d67

I can't find the Thor or the Spider Man that I posted in better quality. I do have alternatives such as the new Thor poster coming out soon, and a totally different Spider Man, but the Spider Man I originally picked was my favorite of them all.
post #430 of 1209
Quote:
Originally Posted by cuzed2 View Post

Nick Buol,
Hope you don't mind if a former Iowan jumps in here?
I see you have had some luck finding suitable higher res images for custom printing. I have what might be an impossible challenge.
Would love to get one of these printed up to a fairly large size, say 50 x 24" , or even 60 x 28" ?



However; after numerous searches of my own; I don't think I will ever find this image with high enough native resolution?
But then again I may not be searching in "all the the right places" biggrin.gif

That is an AMAZING picture! I would love to hear if you end up finding a high resolution.
post #431 of 1209
I have a message into the creator.
I'll update if/as I learn more..
post #432 of 1209
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soupy1970 View Post

Can you tell me the size of the original Thor and Iron Man poster you downloaded from movieposterdb.com? Those look to be the same ones I downloaded and the best I could find on the site was Thor @ 2421 x 3588 and Iron Man @ 2032 x 3000 in the US versions.

Those are probably the exact ones that I downloaded. Those sizes sound right in the ball park from what I remember, they were all around 2000 to 2400 px in width.. I know I had to enlarge them to 24" x 36" in photoshop, and that there wasn't any significant loss of resolution.
post #433 of 1209
Thanks MuaySteve!

I think I have my posters straighten out. I changed them to 150dpi so everything should be good to go now. I decided to stick with the original Spider Man poster I had. I really liked it a lot and hopefully it turns out. If not oh well I will order something else. It will be a good test for future reference.

I'm thinking a will hold off a bit and see what transpires between the Konan Ultra & Performance Knit.
post #434 of 1209
Glad things are worked out. Again, I wasn't saying that what you had wouldn't work, but thought that you were wanting a super crisp image and was hoping that we (mainly speaking for myself) could find you better ones. Since you came back and said that they didn't need to be what I thought you meant, you should be good.

I am still waiting for shipment of my Kona Cotton Ultra sample, but once I get a shipping notification, I will let people know and the day it comes in I will compare it to the original Kona Cotton and the Performance Knit and post pictures.
post #435 of 1209
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickbuol View Post

Glad things are worked out. Again, I wasn't saying that what you had wouldn't work, but thought that you were wanting a super crisp image and was hoping that we (mainly speaking for myself) could find you better ones. Since you came back and said that they didn't need to be what I thought you meant, you should be good.

I am still waiting for shipment of my Kona Cotton Ultra sample, but once I get a shipping notification, I will let people know and the day it comes in I will compare it to the original Kona Cotton and the Performance Knit and post pictures.

Thanks nickbuol! You were a big help. I think you are correct that having them printed at 150dpi (with less enlargement) will turn out better then a 300dpi print that was over enlarged.

I can't wait for your comparison! I'm thinking maybe the Performance Knit is better just for the fact you said it won in the blow test. I have a couple questions concerning the Performance Knit.
1.) On a scale of 1-10 how much easier was it to blow through? One being not much and Ten being incredibly easier.
2.) You think it will be just as easy to keep straight lines where there isn't much forgiveness such as all the text?
3.) you mentioned something about it not needing stretched as much to take wrinkles out. Do you think this would work better since my poster size is the same as the outside diameter the frames will be? Don't really want to be stretching the image to much around the sides.

Thanks,
Soupy
post #436 of 1209
Let me do some more "testing" at home tonight. I will let you know
post #437 of 1209
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickbuol View Post

Let me do some more "testing" at home tonight. I will let you know

Sounds great! Thanks a bunch!
post #438 of 1209
I just got my "it shipped" notification, so maybe by mid-week I will have the Kona Cotton Ultra sample.
post #439 of 1209
Quote:
Originally Posted by tcc View Post

Well got the package today and WOW!! the colours are pretty good. I even tried to bump them up a bit during editing too.

I think if I had stayed with the original Kona I would've been disappointed.

I tried to take some photos/video but I was having all sorts of problems. But once I'm finished and they're up all post them.

What do you guys think of mounting these in a shadow box frame?

Have you started working with these yet? I'm anxiously waiting to hear if you are having any difficulty mounting these to the frame. I'm never done anything like this before so I am a little nervous jumping the gun and ordering the Performance Knit. It doesn't look like rocket science but I would rather not make it a big hassle trying to keep multiple rows of text straight. This is my only real concern with the fabric, everything nickbuol posted other then this 1 thing seems to suggest the Performance Knit is the way to go. I like that it is smoother, better colors, and easier to blow through. The only other slight downfall I could imaging would possibly be the reflectiveness he mentions.

Oh.. You mentioned you tried to bump theme up a bit during editing. How did you do this?

Sorry for all the questions guys. I hope I'm not being a pain! Just want to make sure I'm doing this right.

Thanks,
Soupy
post #440 of 1209
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soupy1970 View Post

Thanks nickbuol! You were a big help. I think you are correct that having them printed at 150dpi (with less enlargement) will turn out better then a 300dpi print that was over enlarged.

I can't wait for your comparison! I'm thinking maybe the Performance Knit is better just for the fact you said it won in the blow test. I have a couple questions concerning the Performance Knit.
1.) On a scale of 1-10 how much easier was it to blow through? One being not much and Ten being incredibly easier.
2.) You think it will be just as easy to keep straight lines where there isn't much forgiveness such as all the text?
3.) you mentioned something about it not needing stretched as much to take wrinkles out. Do you think this would work better since my poster size is the same as the outside diameter the frames will be? Don't really want to be stretching the image to much around the sides.

Thanks,
Soupy

Sorry for the delay...

So on #1, a scale is really hard to put it on since there is no point of reference for you, but the Performance Knit is *significantly* easier to breathe through. What does that mean? Well, the Kona Cotton certainly isn't "hard" to breathe through, but lets say that you just ran up and down a flight of stairs, not enough to make you huff and puff, but if right afterwards you covered your mouth with the Kona Cotton, you would NOT like the inability to breathe quickly through it. Do the same test with the Performance Knit and you will feel just fine. YES, it still limits your air flow though, but not like the Kona.

So the "air flow resistance" of the Performance Knit after running up and down some stairs once or twice (where the Kona is almost feeling suffocating) is about what the Kona feels like when you aren't slightly breathing heavy. You certainly have to put a little bit of effort into breathing through the Kona either way, but it still passes the "blow test".

Not sure how else to explain it.

#2) The Kona is definitely more rigid, which means that the lines stay straighter under little to no pull, however the fact that it is more rigid means that you have to pull harder on it to get rid of any creases. You have to pull on it so hard vs. the light pulling on the Performance Knit that they both end up distorting about the same amount if you aren't careful. Best thing to do with either material is try to get any creases out before attaching it to your frame to minimize the amount of stretch required. Then, when you do stretch it, just make sure that you take your time and use LOTS of staples to hold it in place. I would go back to my previously mentioned tip of using something like duct tape or something to tape down the fabric, get it perfectly even and stretched the way you want, and then put the staples in. Then remove any extra tape (obviously the stuff under the staples won't come out, at least no easily, but you won't see it anyway.

#3) Sort of tied in to #2, but I see the difference. The Kona is possibly better here. I know what you are thinking, isn't that the opposite of what I just said in #2... Not exactly.
While the Kona takes a LOT more force to get rid of the creases, it doesn't actually stretch much. Thus it takes more FORCE, but doesn't have much MOVEMENT. The Performance Knit takes significantly less FORCE, but stretches a lot more. Again, get rid of the wrinkles and creases before mounting, and this won't be an issue either way.


Now we just wait for my Kona Cotton Ultra sample to come this week and see how much better the colors are.
post #441 of 1209
Quote:
Originally Posted by cuzed2 View Post

Nick Buol,
Hope you don't mind if a former Iowan jumps in here?
I see you have had some luck finding suitable higher res images for custom printing. I have what might be an impossible challenge.
Would love to get one of these printed up to a fairly large size, say 50 x 24" , or even 60 x 28" ?



However; after numerous searches of my own; I don't think I will ever find this image with high enough native resolution?
But then again I may not be searching in "all the the right places" biggrin.gif

Well upon the advice of NickBuol;
I was successful in making contact with the creator of this Bond Art. The good news: he is a very nice fellow who got back to me quickly. The bad news; there is NOT a higher resolution image available.

Nick,
If you don't mind; I will be sending you a PM. Looking to get your input on how big this can go, before the resolution becomes a problem.
post #442 of 1209
OK. So I received the Kona Cotton Ultra sample tonight. I then was already booked for the night. I was heading to a house to calibrate their audio system and projector (wow were things out of whack). It took a lot longer than expected because they were in DIRE need of a good subwoofer and just wouldn't believe that their 10 year old $300 subwoofer was crap for their needs (they had a HUGE space to fill). So I went home and grabbed my DIY sub just to show what could be done on a budget and the guy offered me $700 on the spot. I said no and helped him pick out something that is supported by a manufacturer. Anyway, it took a LOT of time.

So, I am beat and sorry my friends, but you are going to have to wait until tomorrow for the comparison with pictures.

Just real quick, yes the Kona Cotton has a LOT better color depth and isn't as washed out as the original Kona Cotton, but still isn't as good of colors as the Performance Knit. I did notice that blues and reds tend to lean towards purple and burgundy with the Kona Cotton Ultra.

The Performance Knit has more even colors, darker colors, and more accurate colors. If there are concerns with anyone on the stretch differences mentioned before, then go with the Kona Cotton Ultra, but I would HIGHLY recommend getting a sample with some colors (mainly blues and reds) that are in your images so that you can tweak and tune them to look the way that you want them to and not "purple" and "burgundy" instead of the desired blue and red.

Obviously the blow test is the same, I mean the fabric is the exact same... It is the "printing" process that has improved and it doesn't seem to have impacted that at all.

Pictures and more information to come tomorrow.
post #443 of 1209
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickbuol View Post

Just real quick, yes the Kona Cotton has a LOT better color depth and isn't as washed out as the original Kona Cotton, but still isn't as good of colors as the Performance Knit. I did notice that blues and reds tend to lean towards purple and burgundy with the Kona Cotton Ultra.

The Performance Knit has more even colors, darker colors, and more accurate colors. If there are concerns with anyone on the stretch differences mentioned before, then go with the Kona Cotton Ultra, but I would HIGHLY recommend getting a sample with some colors (mainly blues and reds) that are in your images so that you can tweak and tune them to look the way that you want them to and not "purple" and "burgundy" instead of the desired blue and red
Guess I made a good choice smile.gif
post #444 of 1209
OK. Now for some Kona Cotton (original) vs. Kona Cotton Ultra vs. Performance Knit pictures.

I already mentioned above about the properties of the Kona Cotton fabric vs the Performance Knit, and the Kona Cotton Ultra is the same fabric with just the new dye coloring/printing on it.

Here are my findings represented by some mediocre photos. tongue.gif

First up, full sample "side by side" images. In all of these pictures, the order, from left to right, is Kona Cotton - Kona Cotton Ultra - Performance Knit

Without flash


With flash



Next a close up of the left 4 colors for the Kona Cotton and then the Kona Cotton Ultra on top (to the right)

Without flash


With flash



Lastly the same close-up, but with the Performance Knit added to the top (right) of the others

Without flash


With flash


The Kona Cotton Ultra is a great improvement over the regular Kona Cotton. It has much more color depth and isn't washed out looking.

The biggest problem I have is evident in the "blue" colors in the lower left and the two colors above the grays in the lower right. They tend towards a more purple tint than what they really should be.

So make your choice. I think that the Performance Knit still looks the best, it definitely passed the "blow" test a LOT easier, and the colors are more accurate, however it does stretch more/easier which can be an blessing or a curse.

I think that in all honesty, people will be happy with either one. The Performance Knit costs more, but you get a larger width that helps out people like me who need to go over a 24"x48" face, plus a .75" frame all around, plus 3.5" depth on that frame, and still have place to staple to the back. That means 1 yard for each of my 6 main panels, where with the Kona Cotton (either version) it would have taken about 1.6 yards per panel.
post #445 of 1209
Looks like they are out of the Kona for now. I'm still trying to figure out how to combine my images into one file.
Edited by Soupy1970 - 10/22/13 at 11:14pm
post #446 of 1209
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soupy1970 View Post

Looks like they are out of the Kona for now. I'm still trying to figure out how to combine my images into one file.

Use photoshop (or a free knock off - they have to be out there) to combine them, that is what I did.
post #447 of 1209
Has anyone looked into the Cotton Poplin which is priced between the Kona and the Performance Knit? If you go here http://www.spoonflower.com/spoonflower_fabrics and look at the print between the three. The Poplin looks pretty decent. Especially looking at the black dots on the bird. Just a thought for those not needing the extra width of the Performance Knit.
post #448 of 1209
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soupy1970 View Post

Has anyone looked into the Cotton Poplin which is priced between the Kona and the Performance Knit? If you go here http://www.spoonflower.com/spoonflower_fabrics and look at the print between the three. The Poplin looks pretty decent. Especially looking at the black dots on the bird. Just a thought for those not needing the extra width of the Performance Knit.

I wouldn't trust their images on their web site. As we all have seen, the original Kona Cotton is nowhere near as dark/vibrant as the new Kona Cotton Ultra or the Performance Knit, and yet in the photos one their web site, it looks almost identical.

I have a fabric sample pack from them, and interestingly almost all of their fabrics pass the "blow" test pretty easily. The sample pack isn't printed on, so I can only see the plain white fabric and not how it handles the print.
post #449 of 1209
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickbuol View Post

I wouldn't trust their images on their web site. As we all have seen, the original Kona Cotton is nowhere near as dark/vibrant as the new Kona Cotton Ultra or the Performance Knit, and yet in the photos one their web site, it looks almost identical.

I have a fabric sample pack from them, and interestingly almost all of their fabrics pass the "blow" test pretty easily. The sample pack isn't printed on, so I can only see the plain white fabric and not how it handles the print.

I been trying to do a little research on Poplin. Mainly to see how well it breathed since it seems to have a tighter weave. The reviews on Amazon boast at how well it prints photos. I'm thinking it is basically what most cotton shirts are made of as well. I'm really tempted to try it as I really don't need the extra width of the Performance Knit. I will use the Performance Knit when I make larger panels down the road though.

I was really hoping you ordered their sample pack! smile.gif So the Poplin does breath well? Decisions.. Decisions... I am a slight gambler so maybe I should just take one for the team and give it a try. Unless you can think of a reason not to? Since you do have a sample of it although unprinted.
post #450 of 1209
Is anyone using their own pictures?

We have a Nikon D5000 shooting in JPG + Raw, but I have not sat down to learn digital post processing... I know the .jpg's are 300dpi, and somewhere in the 3xxx X 2xxx pixel range. What do I need to do to get prints in the 2'x3', 2'x4', 3'x4', and 3'x5' range? We have a shared play area/theatre so I need to use pictures of our kids and family for WAF.

Basically I am looking to work backwards from the final dimensions and need some help.

Take 2'w X 4'h
2' x 12" x 150dpi = 3600 pixels wide
4' x 12" x 150dpi = 7200 pixels high

If our images are wide(3xxx by 2xxx @ 300dp), I can use the full height of the shot, but only take a 1/3 of the width for a chunk of our 3:2 image to fit the 1:2 print. If the max height of our photo is 2xxx pixels, then the max width of our cropped image is 1xxx pixels. Do I automatically double this for the 300dpi to 150dpi difference? Conservatively assuming that the pixels double for 150dpi and the image is actually 2000x4000pixels, that is still only ~13"x 26" print... How can I blow it up?
Edited by rfbrang - 10/25/13 at 12:31pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Home Entertainment & Theater Builder › Dedicated Theater Design & Construction › DIY Custom-Printed Movie Poster Acoustic Panels - cheap!