Inkjet printing larger than 64"

[artcorr]

I'm trying to find some info (and not having much luck) on inkjet printing larger than the max allowable by the biggest Epsons which is 64" on the short end.

I've seen prints by multiple photographers with short edges of over 80" so I know it's been done.

Any idea if this is done by splicing multiple prints together or are there larger printers out there?

[Oren Grad]

If you've got $90,000 to burn, the F-series Epsons go up to 76 inches.

[Kiwi7475]

There’s some, probably not cheap.
This one up to 120”, they also have 80” ones:

https://www.efi.com/products/inkjet-...-30h/overview/

[Tin Can]

Wallpaper

https://www.megaprint.com/permanent_...hp?area=wPaper

USA

[Ron McElroy]

One thing to keep in mind when dealing with most wide format printing companies is their customer base is commercial signage. The substrates and inks may not be what you desire. Certainly their are printers that specialize in fine art, but I do not know of any.

[bob carnie]

Metro Imaging UK and one in Germany can make supersised C prints.. I have a 60 inch Canon, Epson make 64 inch.
You also could look into flat bed printing super sized. Lamont Imaging in NY may be a place to start.

[Drew Wiley]

Apprentice to a master wallpaper hanger. Not much difference. But wet mounting is an acquired skill best consigned to a framing shop that already has the skills and equipment, like a huge vacuum press. It will be expensive. Regardless, even if you get it all printed onto a single huge sheet, it will still have to be mounted somehow. Best to get it all done by the same place, and then figure out how to ship the darn thing.

And note the important distinction Ron made. Advertising expectations and personal expectations might differ significantly.

[martiansea]

Many of Jeff Wall's famous lightbox pieces are two stitched together. That shows it's possible to do it that way, at least.

[Drew Wiley]

Stitching big transparencies together is especially tricky because the laminate material itself has a totally unforgiving permanent acrylic adhesive. Not like wet mounting, where the biggest risk is getting something wet and sticky on the surface of the print. With high-tack acrylic foils, one little wrinkle or bubble, or annoying speck inside, and the whole job is ruined. Smaller work, especially in the past, was simply sandwiched between sheets of Plexiglas.

The largest such job I ever saw was a digitally stitched together b&w shot of incredible detail of the backside of the moon taken and printed by NASA. At some point in the project, my nephew worked at a multimillion dollar stitching station at LBL, in front of a screen six feet wide, long before PS stitching came on the horizon. Tens of thousands of individual satellite images were involved overall, and no doubt many more persons took rounds at that station over several years. But the seamless physical stitching of the actual printed portions of that, involving maybe twenty sections overall, well, that was another humdinger entirely. The displayed full thing was about around forty feet in diameter if I recall correctly, but unlike a big billboard, held immaculate detail up close; and the seams were almost impossible to detect. And it helped to have a NASA sized budget.

Really amazing physical sheet stitching is being done in Las Vegas, with entire giant hallways of faux printed marble walls and ornate ceiling paintings as if it were the Sistine chapel being wallpapered on by expert paper hangers. One of the most difficult tasks is mirror laminates, where even the slightest unevenness in flatness stands out like a sore thumb. The kind of spray contact adhesives used for that can literally be lethal; and a short life is one of the known occupational hazards.

[artcorr]

Thank you for the replies everyone

Many of Jeff Wall's famous lightbox pieces are two stitched together. That shows it's possible to do it that way, at least.

Jeff Wall was one of the photographers I was referencing, it seems he's likely doing that with inkjet prints now too. Since posting, another I've noticed listed that it was printed on a paper that doesn't come wider than 64" as far as I know, so again likely stitched together.