I am trying to design a 200x100ft banner in photoshop. The current specs I need to achieve are (200x100in at 1000DPI) with my DPI being so high my vendor can stretch the image to be 200x100ft. My problem is...........my file currently takes 2 hours to open. I have a Mac Pro (Late 2013) 3.7 GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon E5 32 GB Ram 1600 MHz DDR3. Do I need to max out my ram at 64 or 128? Or at some point will I not be able to use more than 60gb of ram and just be wasting it?
That 200" bt 100" is like 16' by 8' a 100dip image would look good printed that size. That would still be 200,000,000 which is a lot of pixels. Less may even be good.
That would need to be printed in strips. On roll paper two strips 4' wide. 100,000,000px each.
Thank you so much for the tips. I am fairly familiar with how to install and print, but it always helps to have some advice on sizing. I guess the main question I have is it worth it to have my company upgrade me to 128gb of ram? Or will a wall this size just use like 45gb of ram (even if I have 128). Basically do I need to upgrade ram or do I need to have something else upgraded?
The company I work for is creating wraps for buildings. I am currently wrapping the side of a building that is 200x100ft. Since that size is too large for photoshop I make the specs smaller and up the DPI so when it is stretched to full size there is no distortion (the wrap will be applied to areas that will be seen very close up so I can't let it be blurry like a billboard). I understand it is going to have to be slightly pixelated but I just did a wall that was 50ft by 100ft and it worked perfectly. It just took my computer almost 5 hours to save.
We also have our on in house print shop that installs everything.
I am aware this is a very unusual request, but I do fully understand how pixels work, and how to manipulate them. Ive just never worked with anyone doing something this large.
If you really feel you need a 200' by 100' high resolution image. Nothing will print that large you will have to tile that. 12"x12'" tiles would requite 20,000. So break your image up. Create 20,000 image 1'x1' at any resolution you want. If you want that many pixels it will requites lots of time to produce and print them. Use vector graphics illustrator art would produce good pixels quality. 20,000 image quite a few images to print not going to be cheap is it in you budget.
Yeah we have the budget for this! I really appreciate that advice! I think just putting everything in tiles would be my best option. I also might do a small test print at full size at 72dpi and just see how it looks. I have printed at 72 before and it still looked nice. Even then do you think upgrading the ram past 32 would help?
I am trying to design a 200x100ft banner in photoshop. The current specs I need to achieve are (200x100in at 1000DPI) with my DPI being so high my vendor can stretch the image to be 200x100ft.
That's 200 000 pixels, which is just plain ridiculous. You can safely forget about creating this as one single file.
If this kind of resolution really is required (which I doubt), make it in segments.
Maybe I am misunderstanding something. If 200x100in at 1000dpi gets stretched to 200x100ft that would make my image 200x100ft at 100dpi. How is 100dpi too many pixels? The only reason I am making the image 1000dpi is because I need to stretch it. My vendor manually can stretch my files to meet our needs. So when I provide them with a 1000dpi image and they stretch it accordingly the image comes out crystal clear.
That is what I was trying to get at though. This is not like a billboard or outdoor banner that will be seen from afar. This in some cases will be applied to the floor and people will be walking on it so people will be seeing it up and close.
I am designing multiple versions of this. Some will be on walls and I will make sure to use lower DPI but for the floor Id like it to be nice.
Answer to your initial question is - a lot. I have 64GB of RAM of which I allow Photoshop to use 42GB ( I also use blender at the same time so do not give Photoshop the lot). I upscaled a photograph image to the size you mention (single layer - 8 bit - 200000 x 100000 pixels 55.9GB document size) and saved it as a PSB file (10.6GB file size on disk) to a normal (non SSD) spinning disk.
On a freshly started Photoshop, it took 4 mins and 58 secs to load and be ready to use and the efficiency when open is 45% i.e. it is still going to be back and forth to the scratch disk. If you add layers it will get worse.
A question you need to also answer is: If you can create an image with that many pixels where are you going the get those pixels? What quality will the pixels have. You will not have high quality pixels if you interpolate a small image to an image that large. You will just have a large poor image.
I don't doubt it's doable with a top-spec machine and plenty of time, the question is if it's workable, or necessary.
Just to get specific, consider what 100 ppi really means. It means each pixel is 1/4 mm in size, or to you in the non-metric world, 1/100 inch. Put a one-inch marker at the tip of your shoes, and divide it into one hundred segments. That's what we're talking about.
JJ's question is a good one. Where will you get 200 000 pixels? The highest resolution commercially available in a sensor today, is the Phase One IQ3 100MP, which will set you back roughly $50 000 (yes, that's USD fifty thousand). Its files weigh in at 11608 x 8708 pixels. That's still a lot of photomerging.
17
Replies
AdChoices