|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
DBLEXPOSURE
Guest
|
 Posted: Tue May 08, 2007 12:44 am Post subject: Re: Looking for film scanner |
 |
|
| Quote: | Resolution isn't a reliable scanner specification, since it's mostly
stated in terms of the mechanics of the scanner, rather than as any sort
of measured ability to resolve things. The Epson scanners in particular
are known for using multiple offset lower-resolution sensors, and claiming
2x the resolution.
The quality of the optics and any mirrors in the light path, and how well
the film holders hold the film flat are key factors in getting high
quality results. The flatbeds generally have extra air-glass interfaces
in the light path, and not even coated glass.
I've scanned 35mm slides and negs on a number of flatbeds and a number of
real film scanners, and the difference is night and day. You can't make a
reasonable choice just from the numbers cited by the manufacturers.
|
Well that makes sense, I don't scan much anymore but I have been thinking
off and on about getting into medium or large format and I would want to
scan those negs.
So, if the resolution spec is not reliable, how do you determine which
scanner will, in the end, give me the largest print? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Fix your Windows Problems - FAST.
FREE Safe Scan Registry Check. Locate & Fix Errors in Minutes!
|
|
CSM1
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue May 08, 2007 12:44 am Post subject: Re: Looking for film scanner |
|
|
"DBLEXPOSURE" <pzig98@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Bo-dnZuGhJQTD6LbnZ2dnUVZ_o6gnZ2d@giganews.com...
| Quote: |
Resolution isn't a reliable scanner specification, since it's mostly
stated in terms of the mechanics of the scanner, rather than as any sort
of measured ability to resolve things. The Epson scanners in particular
are known for using multiple offset lower-resolution sensors, and
claiming 2x the resolution.
The quality of the optics and any mirrors in the light path, and how well
the film holders hold the film flat are key factors in getting high
quality results. The flatbeds generally have extra air-glass interfaces
in the light path, and not even coated glass.
I've scanned 35mm slides and negs on a number of flatbeds and a number of
real film scanners, and the difference is night and day. You can't make
a reasonable choice just from the numbers cited by the manufacturers.
Well that makes sense, I don't scan much anymore but I have been thinking
off and on about getting into medium or large format and I would want to
scan those negs.
So, if the resolution spec is not reliable, how do you determine which
scanner will, in the end, give me the largest print?
|
The one with the highest optical resolution for the film format you are
scanning.
Print size is determined by the size of the film and the resolution of the
scan and the resolution you print at.
Example:
35 mm film = 24 mm x 36 mm frame size.
Assuming using the maximum image you can get out of the film and the print.
(Not trying to use a standard print size).
Scan at 3200 dpi (the max for some scanners) dpi and ppi are
interchangeable.
(25.4 mm per inch)
Convert mm to inches.
24 mm / 25.4 = 0.945 inches short side
36 mm / 25.4 = 1.417 inches long side
0.945 inches * 3200 dpi = 3024 pixels
1.417 inches * 3200 dpi = 4534 pixels
Scan 35 mm film full frame gives you a 3024 X 4534 Pixel image when scanned
at 3200 dpi.
Say you print that image at 300 DPI (best print)
3024 pixels / 300 dpi = 10.08 inches
4534 pixels / 300 dpi = 15.11 inches
You end up with a 10 x 15 inch print from full frame 35 mm film. If the
scanner is a 3200 dpi scanner.
Fitting the scanned image to standard print sizes is another subject. You
have to crop somewhere!
--
CSM1
http://www.carlmcmillan.com
-- |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
David Dyer-Bennet
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue May 08, 2007 10:55 pm Post subject: Re: Looking for film scanner |
|
|
DBLEXPOSURE wrote:
| Quote: | Resolution isn't a reliable scanner specification, since it's mostly
stated in terms of the mechanics of the scanner, rather than as any sort
of measured ability to resolve things. The Epson scanners in particular
are known for using multiple offset lower-resolution sensors, and claiming
2x the resolution.
The quality of the optics and any mirrors in the light path, and how well
the film holders hold the film flat are key factors in getting high
quality results. The flatbeds generally have extra air-glass interfaces
in the light path, and not even coated glass.
I've scanned 35mm slides and negs on a number of flatbeds and a number of
real film scanners, and the difference is night and day. You can't make a
reasonable choice just from the numbers cited by the manufacturers.
Well that makes sense, I don't scan much anymore but I have been thinking
off and on about getting into medium or large format and I would want to
scan those negs.
So, if the resolution spec is not reliable, how do you determine which
scanner will, in the end, give me the largest print?
|
You can't pick the right one by simple inspection of specification numbers.
If you *really* need the "largest" print, then look into getting a
commercial drum scan done at their top res.
Unfortunately, price is a fairly reliable guide; small price differences
don't mean much, but consumer flatbeds are bottom of the heap,
professional graphics flatbeds (like the Epson V750) rather better,
dedicated film scanners like the Nikon Coolscan 9000ED (for medium
format) are much better, and the commercial-grade scanners like the
Flextight and the real drum scanners are better still.
The difference between a flatbed and a film scanner is much bigger than
the difference between any two film scanners. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| |
Watched Topics
Search
Register
Log in to check your private messages
Profile
Log in
Memberlist
Usergroups