Updated: Mobile photo prints: How big can you go?

iphone photo print enlargement iphoneography


With all the recent improvements in mobile phone cameras, Life In LoFi’s definitive iPhone/Mobile Photo Print Sizes guide has been updated to reflect the larger file sizes of iPhone and mobile cameras as well as the increased processing power of some of the new photo apps. While the updated post is written for iPhone users, the information it features is valid for all mobile phone cameras — as well as DSLRs and digital point-and-shoot cameras.

Since I first wrote my original post, “iPhone photo prints: How big can you go?” back in August 2010, a lot has happened in iPhoneography and mobile photography. The camera on the iPhone has improved greatly — the iPhone 4S has an 8 megapixel camera. Apps have been released and updated to take advantage of the large photo sizes of the 4S as well as the larger sizes of images shot with other cameras and moved to iDevices for processing. There have been many brick and mortar exhibits both large and small, including many mobile photographers making prints for local showings.

From my original post:

One very important factor in printing images is image size — the number of pixels in your image — how they are used differently for screen and print. An image that looks great on your screen may not have enough data or pixels to print as well. That’s why it’s always best to work with the largest image and the most pixels possible.

Click here to read the entire post,  “Mobile photo prints: How big can you go? with updated info and tables. It’s a good resource to bookmark.




About Marty Yawnick 1808 Articles
Marty is a self-employed graphic designer in the Fort Worth/Dallas Metroplex. He is an avid Rangers baseball, Chicago Cubs, Packers and Highbury Arsenal fan. In addition to capturing random moments with whatever camera is close by (usually his iPhone), his other interests include coffee, film, music, and traveling in seats 5E and 5F with his fiancé.
  • http://twitter.com/HanSoloSays @HanSoloSays

    For what its worth I just got a 30×30 from hipstamatic recently (from my iphone4) that looks grreat

  • http://www.iPhoneArt.com nate park

    i read this interesting article from photojojo this week about an interesting process to make large prints from lower resolution images. I would love to hear from you and the community if any one has tried it and what their results were. http://content.photojojo.com/diy/diy-turn-phone-p

  • http://www.facebook.com/grocap Mykhailo Liapin

    I printed 20×30 sm from my iPhone4. It was without almost none enlargement (10 or 15%)
    And i printed 15×15 sm from instagram format of 612x612px and it looks not so bad:) but i printed the same instagram image for 10×10 and it looked briliant.

  • http://andrewbwhite.tumblr.com/ Andrew B. White

    Marty – is there any real advantage to using Genuine Fractals (Perfect Resize) to resize images, apart from the handy sizing menus etc? I did an A-B test using conventional resizing in Photoshop vs Perfect Resize (free demo version). Resizing and image optimising is something I do everyday as part of my job and I get good results. Is there something about the likes of Perfect Resize that I'm not getting? Should I stick with my Photoshop work flow or shell out the $99 for Perfect Photo. In regard to iPhone photos, this a 'last stage' process purely for sizing/optimising images for photographic print production – no editing (all done on teh iPhone).

    • http://lifeinlofi.com lifeinlofiblog

      Hi, Andrew,

      I swear by Perfect Resize (the old Genuine Fractals). I've been using it for years since version 1.0. I may have some comparison images I did to test it, but they are probably long deleted. Briefly-ish, here's what I've found:

      — Most of the time, PR/GF produces better results than Photoshop Bicubic or Bicubic Smoother resampling. I'd say in at least 80% of images I throw at it. It is slightly better in the details — to my eye, it's noticeably better. It doesn't work on all images, though. There a percentage where Photoshop's resampling just *looks* better.

      — It's much better at resampling smaller, low to medium resolution images than Photoshop. From clients, I get images purposed for the web all the time to be used for print. I run them through PR/GF. They're not great, but they're usable.

      — It's much better at resampling huge images and preserving details. We use PR/GF at a Fortune 500 company that I freelance for to enlarge images to be repurposed for oversize and billboard output.

      I've tested the Alien Skin plug-in as well. It's good, too. Enlargements look a little smoother than PR/GF. I like the sharpness of PR/GF despite the texture that it doesn't completely smooth out.

      If you regularly work with large images needing to be larger or small images needing to be usable, I definitely recommend the purchase. If you and your clients are happy with the results you get in your current Photoshop workflow, then it may not be worth the $99 to you.

      For me, I bought it and I have upgraded regularly since version 1.0. I hope this helps.


  • http://andrewbwhite.tumblr.com/ Andrew B. White

    Hey Marty – thanks for that in depth reply – I shall investigate it more and try out more resizing. About to print out some images for an iPhoneography show next week.