How big can you print a photo from a 35mm negative?

Sharpness doesn’t mean anything - the world of pixel peeping is for gear heads and not photographers

In classic silver printing in the darkroom, very large enlargements can be made, the quality will always be superior to a digitized negative. I have attended exhibitions of prints measuring more than a meter on a side from 35mm film and which were very clear. It also depends on the quality of the material used.

Here is reply from the answer of thoughts in my head for a month thank you

If I know that I want to take pictures that have to be blown up or printed on poster scale, 35mm film would not even cross my mind. So I don’t see the point. Small negatives for small enlargements, large negatives for large enlargements.

The answer is: As big as you want. It just depends upon how far away the viewer will be.

Thanks for the video! like @ralphtoerres13208 said, would be really interesting to see print sizes compared alongside different film stocks. I'm hoping to sell some group photo prints from music festivals, and would love to have a good comparison before giving that a shot

If you’re using a scan, the print size will depend on the quality of the scan. I was hoping the comparison would be from the negative itself. Maybe you can revisit this question with a darkroom pro ;)

Acceptable print size for 35mm depends from multiple factors: Especially the scan could make extrem differences and in best case you start with a drum scan. The Cinestill is also not the film with highest resolution and there are definitely better color films (search for Henning Serger, Germany - he has done scientific analysis). By far the best color films are slide films like Provia and Ektachrome E100, followed by Ektar 100 and Cinestill 50D. In its own class is Adox CMS 20ii. The resolution exceeds 200-300 MP and here other components become the bottle neck (lens, scanner). Interesting topic in general…

I have made nice 13x19 prints at 35mm film, it all depends on the film and the type of image. For most work, I do use medium format in 6x6 or 6x7, they really deliver images that are detailed in massive size prints. Even cropping 6x6 to 645 seems to surpass the quality of 35mm. When it comes to digital, FF sensors can deliver higher quality images in larger sized prints. I can get large detailed size 40” prints from my Nikon D800, I can only imagine that digital medium format can do billboard size prints. Again, it’s all the type of image and the end product.

What's that picture in the back ground of the man playing the guitar?! I want that!

135 format, i.e., “35mm” is good for up to about 8x10 prints. This is why traditionally formal portraits, product photography and such were shot on medium format.

Basically, keep the enlargement below 6x and the print looks it could have been shot with modern digital. And before the days when digital capture was the rule, that’s what photogs looked for and clients demanded.

I never use Topaz with 35mm scans with digital images it looks very good but with film it's crappie. Probably AI can not deal with grain on those photos

Can you do a video comparing different types of film? Like film optimized for digitizing (Kodak Porta 400) compared to film optemized for a sharper image from a 35mm SLR (ADOX CMS 20 II)? Awesome video btw, I wish more people delved into this subject lol