I stumbled across this image lately on one of my many quests for visual entertainment. Besides the fact that it is a famous masterpiece/comic style avant la lettre painting and also simply a beautiful work of art, I also think its the largest (8261x5653 pixels) image I have ever downloaded of the web.

So that got me wondering about two things:

1. I'm sure most of y'all are familiar with 'the image exceeds the size Save for Web was designed for blablabla... message, but when does PS stop being able to turn an image into a 72 dpi resolution file?

2. Who can find the largest 72 dpi image that is freely downloadable on the web?

The hunt is open... Godspeed to all...

I’ve seen this image before…very beautiful image.

If I’m understanding you right your question is trivial.

1)- PS stops turning an image 72 dpi when you tell it to. You are in total control. No one says you can’t output an image as large as you want. But if you’re using it for the web, be ready to accept long download times and its consequences.

2)-Why would you want to find the largest 72 dpi when for many years the web has been turning more towards 96 dpi and Flash vector?

1. Didn't know that was a preference thing you could adjust. My bad.

2. OK, find me the largest 96 dpi image then. Or don't...

2 - dpi doesn't mean squat until you actually go to print an image on paper.

An 8261x5653 pixel image is the exact same image whether it's 10 dpi, 72 dpi, or 600 dpi.

If you go to where you can find the "Earth Textures" they are ginormous as well (21600x10800 - no kidding!) - enjoy! Otherwise, if it's posted on the web I usually find a limit to their size is under 2,000px - stock sites will have larger files.

-Lew

 like thunder said, size only really come into play when you go to output the image in print. 

i don't know how many time i've had to explain resolution to people when they give me a SD card from their camera and want me to send them the images so they can email them to family and friends... it's always "so, do you want them to just look at them on screen? do you want them to be able to print them at a photo lab??"

i've got to the point where i just pull the files and send! Last time, there was a scream from the next office over because when i she opened the image of her kid there was just this huge eye staring at her (due to the resolution) .... oh well.

as to your post, limitations last only as long as hardware limits them... there was a time when you could not save a 20mg file because your hard drive was only 20mgs.

:)
retrocity

Quote - as to your post, limitations last only as long as hardware limits them... there was a time when you could not save a 20mg file because your hard drive was only 20mgs.

:)
retrocity

Ah, the good ol' days... I remember the first company I worked for, developing software... we sold Altos computers (No? I'd never heard of them before that either, and I haven't heard anything about them for a long time since).

They came with 40 Mb hard drives, 1/2 a Mb of RAM (yes, that's 500 kilobytes, kiddies!). Or you could buy the "deluxe" model, which came with 80 Mb of hard drive and an entire, full 1 Mb of RAM. Yay!

To contrast, I downloaded a couple of PDF files this morning that totaled a touch over 100 MB. Didn't even think about how big they were, just made a folder on one of the four (300+ Gb) hard drives I've got, downloaded them in a couple of minutes via my trusty cable modem, then for good measure I copied them to my 8 GB flash drive so I could read them on another computer later.

My, but the times they do change.

*"there was a time when you could not save a 20mg file because your hard drive was only 20mgs."

"My, but the times they do change"

Gotta say, both of these gave me a good chuckle - thanks guys! I'm recalling my first computer - a Tandy 4KB computer with a tape drive - ahhh, the memories of programming a picture of a duck in a pond (to be 640x480) and running out of memory midway through...

-Lew ;-)

Quote - 2 - dpi doesn't mean squat until you actually go to print an image on paper.

I know, but still thanks

So 21600x10800 is the biggest anyone found so far?

Keep in mind that unless it has a specific purpose, no one is going to put a truly ginormous image on the web (other than the periodic anomolies we have discussed above that weren't "web prepped").

The ONLY reason I have actually worked with truly enormous images is because I worked in a pro-lab where we did 6' wide images (the rolls we used were 72" wide) to any length the client wanted/needed - 14', 50', etc (and even those tended to be 200dpi max given that NO ONE was going to be within 5 feet of them to look up close to check for any pixellation - many roaodside billboards are 12dpi - and 36dpi tops!). And these were saved onto portable HDs and brought to us to print out of a Lambda.

Most DSLRs top out at 12-ish MP, so there isn't a plethora of large images beyond that taken today. Every once in a while someone will need a huge scan of a medium or large format neg/transparency, but again, that's use specific - if that huge scan was prepped to go on the web it would be downsized to something viewable without having to be tiled - typically so people won't have to scroll side to side, or up and down, though some are left a little bigger.

Hope this makes sense-
-Lew