Attached Link: http://www.artbycomputer.com

Laser on photo paper is done by LightJet, Lambda or Kyocera. Lightjet does individual sheets, currently up to 10' x 6'. Lambda and Kyocera use paper off rolls, currently 4' x <150'.

Attached Link: http://www.artbycomputer.com

Interestingly, just yesterday I was wondering how much a vehicle wrap would be. They're plastic and are printed with a big inkjet. That would certainly get it seen be a lot of people. A couple months ago, in the L.A. Times, was a long article about people having custom wallpaper made. Fractals would be perfect for that, since they can go on and on! BTW, just what is "mainstream" anyway? dr

Attached Link: http://www.artbycomputer.com

Is there something I don't understand about big images? I may be the only person working on a Mac and maybe its that I don't use the same software... . I don't mind letting my computer run for 3 days on a single image. Is UF or the other PC software so hardware intensive that the images can't be run at 4'x4'@300dpi? A mere 14,400px.... And yes, the content is what's important

Go to an art gallery. Go to several. Mostly what you see is very large. 3' x 5' would be considered mid-sized. I looked at DEAGOL's incredible "To Good Friends". He couldn't stock enough if they were 4' square, rendered Hi Rez. dr

Attached Link: http://www.artbycomputer.com

Keith is right. Size is very important - one of the reasons I go big. The difference between an 8.5" x 11" print and a 13" x 19" is enormous, at least for the attention people pay when looking! When I show people my 3' x 5' "Big Green Cat", they just stand and look at it for 5 minutes. They step closer, they step back.

The crummy small ones on my website at 800px x X, just don't do it justice. I have a 3' x 7' "Two Guys' Eyes" hanging in the living room where it can be seen from the street. People have come to the door asking about it. You can't do that with 1024x768.

Dave Reed

Message edited on: 01/08/2005 20:39

Attached Link: http://www.artbycomputer.com

Good subject. The main problem I've had selling is getting the art in front of the buyer. I like to work huge and I'm sure i could have my own show easily (there's about a million galleries here in L.A.). The problem I'm really faced with is $. LightJet prints aren't cheap and a 6x10 footer is more than $1200. I don't have $15,000 sitting around for printing. Coffee shops, etc., are great places to get it seen and even sold, especially if the store gets a cut. The chances of it getting thrashed is fairly high, especially if they rotate the stuff through. Of the dozen or so I've sold, it's been through personal meetings. Me, the buyer and my "portfolio". I then take an order and the production house delivers the product, since they have a truck that can hold it. I've taken my books (13x19 ring-type binders) to several galleries. The owners expressed interest, but I have to HAVE the art to hang, and they won't commission any. I'd leave the books, but the 60 or so pieces I have in that format cost nearly $1000 and I'd need a bunch of books to cover even some of the galleries. Later this month I'm taking 12 printed as greeting cards to the gift show convention to try to find a publisher. Anything to try to get it out there. Just a few thoughts. Dave Reed

Attached Link: http://www.ArtByComputer.com

OK, I put it up. Sorry about the delay - I know you guys were waiting with baited breath....

Attached Link: "I'm paying for the bandwidth, you can look for FREE!!"

Rick: You are right. Resizing does lose sharpness, but I _am_ "rendering an image for print by a professional printer". Bigger is better! As for storage I have ~25 DVDs burned full of the stuff, and more to go! On the other hand, all of mine are "pure" fractals, no layers except in one case, the glowing eyes in "Kiss Me, Quick", in my gallery here on Renderosity. 150 layers of stuff seems a lot to handle, though the results can be worth the trouble, as much of the beautiful stuff here attests. Tomorrow, I'll post here a small per/pixel piece of "Smoke", also here on R'osity, to appreciate the detail that extends over the whole 7'x4' work. dr

Attached Link: "I'm paying for the bandwidth, you can look for FREE!!"

Rick: You are right. Resizing does lose sharpness, but I _am_ "rendering an image for print by a professional printer". Bigger is better! As for storage I have ~25 DVDs burned full of the stuff, and more to go! On the other hand, all of mine are "pure" fractals, no layers except in one case, the glowing eyes in "Kiss Me, Quick", in my gallery here on Renderosity. 150 layers of stuff seems a lot to handle, though the results can be worth the trouble, as much of the beautiful stuff here attests. Tomorrow, I'll post here a small per/pixel piece of "Smoke", also here on R'osity, to appreciate the detail that extends over the whole 7'x4' work. dr

Attached Link: http://artbycomputer.com

I do not own a Lightjet. One of my incarnations is as the lead graphics person at a printing broker. I live in Los Angeles and you can get virtually whatever you want here. I use one main output house for them, and have found 4 others within my easy reach. These are not cheap machines. There is only one machine in the greater L.A. area capable of doing 6'x10'.

Attached Link: http://artbycomputer.com

The biggest I've done so far is 24' x 4' @300dpi. That would be 86,400 x 14,400 pixels. This only exists in 3 seperate panels of 28,800 x 14,400 pixels, that is, I don't have any software that will handle that big a file. Post processing has to be handled carefully. I put Pshop into action record mode so I can do the same to the other panels. Having somewhere to display it is also a problem. That particular one took about 20 min/square foot to render. Of course I do this so I can make really big prints and have all the detail.

A pic of me at my door. The keyboard to my right suffered "sugar poisoning" when I knocked over a bottle of Gatorade. DON'T DO THAT. They misbehave afterwords....

You're welcome!

Meant to add, that's what I use. You can check out some of its output (my output) at my site: http://www.artbycomputer.com LOL Dave

Try to find MandelBrowser. Freeware, old, not supported, very slightly buggy, but it makes pretty pictures. Works in "Classic" mode. Dave