Scanning Resolution

[robertrose]

Fair question. Instructions from Epson; my own judgment when printing on the 3800 to Epson paper; and Eric Chan's website, a Principal Scientist at Adobe:
http://people.csail.mit.edu/ericchan...tml#native_res
"If the 'Finest Detail' driver setting is unchecked, the 3800's native resolution is 360 pixels per inch (ppi). If the 'Finest Detail' driver setting is checked, the 3800's native resolution is 720 ppi. For most photographs, I recommend unchecking (disabling) the 'Finest Detail' driver setting and preparing your final images at 360 ppi."
Chan explains that the 720 setting is for vector-based data including text, graphics, and line art. He speculates that prints will not benefit from higher resolution higher than 360, and that accords with my experience.
I have no doubt that your experience might differ, especially with different papers and inks, and recommend experiments.

[robertrose]

Yes, but he notes that the higher 720 dpi makes a difference mostly for line art. He also makes the point that your results may differ, and I certainly agree with that.

[robertrose]

I salute you; I don't have a way to print 32x40 and no one has ordered that big a print from me. Yet.

[Jac@stafford.net]

When printing using an Epson large format printer and the standard Epson driver the length of the image cannot exceed 32767 pixels.
...

I haven's used that unsigned 16bit int since programming PDP-11s. Perhaps someone smarter than I can explain why Epson is limited to such. Architecture? Little old chips?

[Ken Lee]

I found no tangible benefits printing at 720 dpi - only inconvenience. I went back to 360 dpi. I like it better.

[lbenac]

Excuse by advance my lack of knowledge but I seem to recall reading instructions for Piezography ink printing on QTR to the effect that it was "better" to send the image to QTR at full pixel strength (no down-sampling to 360 dpi) and let QTR do that portion.
QTR I understand that QTR doe snot use the Epson driver so it might explain the difference?

Cheers,

Luc

[paulr]

"Finest detail" is a raster setting optimized for line art; it's not ideal for images with photographic gradients.

I'm retracting this; it's what I was taught, but I think Peter is right; this just sets the driver to 720ppi native resolution. I don't believe there's any difference that would be detrimental to gradients.

I haven't tested this setting on or off; it would be worth a few experiments. In case it isn't obvious, it only makes sense if the resolution of your file is higher than 360ppi without any upsampling.

[Peter De Smidt]

I found no tangible benefits printing at 720 dpi - only inconvenience. I went back to 360 dpi. I like it better.

Printing on matte paper? I expect that there's only a noticeable difference, if there is any at all, with glossy paper.

[JChrome]

Interestingly enough, not only do you not need higher resolution but you might also prefer a "lower" quality scanner.

I took the below photo during 2014's burning man. A friend showed great interest in it and so I decided to give him a print. The below was scanned using a canon 9000f flatbed (something like $150.00). The negative is a 6x9 portra 160. Notice the dust marks (this was shot during a dust storm and it was impossible to keep that fine dust from the film).

Wanting to get the "best of the best" I drum scanned at 5000 dpi and got a beautiful 2.5 gigabyte tiff file. Wet mounting the scan on the drum scanner smoothed out the dust marks sufficiently so that they are almost* imperceptible.

The flatbed's light refracted the dust marks on the film and exaggerated them. But I think this is what my friend wants! The dust spots starts a conversation that just isn't there without the dust.

What do you gents think?

Flatbed Scanner (with dust)


(Drum scanned version to come)

[fishbulb]

This conversation reminds me a lot of the scene in Star Wars Episode III:

Anakin Skywalker: If you're not with me, then you're my enemy.
Obi-Wan Kenobi: Only a Sith deals in absolutes.
[draws his lightsaber]

Everyone has a different workflow.

For some, scanning is labor-intensive, so they scan once at the highest possible/useful resolution.
For others, they don't mind rescanning if they want to print larger..
And others even prefer dust spots and scanning artifacts, apparently.

Each to his own.