Page 1 of 12 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 119

Thread: Scanning Resolution Question

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Doncaster UK
    Posts
    306

    Scanning Resolution Question

    Apart from producing a larger file and being able to produce a larger print, will scanning at a higher resolution give you more detail?

    Example
    If from a 4x5 negative, I want to create an inkjet print which is 16 x 20 inches then in theory in the scanner software, I could set the scan resolution to 1440 which would give me 16x20 inches if I sent the file to the printer at 360ppi

    Question
    Would I gain and more detail in the scan if I was to say scan it at a resolution of say 2400 and then down size in Photoshop when ready to print ?

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Tucson AZ
    Posts
    1,248

    Re: Scanning Resolution Question

    The question is whether or not you'd gain VISIBLE detail in the final print. Overscanning and down-sampling primarily helps by averaging the noise in the scan giving a cleaner image, so It's generally a good thing to do, but it doesn't add any "detail".

    Depending on the scanner, you might not get an actual 2400 even if that's what you set into the software - regardless of what the maker claims. What scanner do you have?

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Glasgow
    Posts
    139

    Re: Scanning Resolution Question

    Quote Originally Posted by IanBarber View Post
    Apart from producing a larger file and being able to produce a larger print, will scanning at a higher resolution give you more detail?

    Example
    If from a 4x5 negative, I want to create an inkjet print which is 16 x 20 inches then in theory in the scanner software, I could set the scan resolution to 1440 which would give me 16x20 inches if I sent the file to the printer at 360ppi

    Question
    Would I gain and more detail in the scan if I was to say scan it at a resolution of say 2400 and then down size in Photoshop when ready to print ?
    2000-2400ppi is arguably all you need from 4x5 - but that depends on you having a scanner that can deliver those pixels in a clean, sharp fashion without halation & other nasty micro-contrast destroying abberations. In other words, a 'higher' resolution scan from an Epson may look far worse than a 'lower' resolution scan from a drum scanner or high end flatbed. Anyway, scanning once at the highest resolution you'll potentially need is generally best practice - the less you handle the negative the better.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Doncaster UK
    Posts
    306

    Re: Scanning Resolution Question

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Andrada View Post
    The question is whether or not you'd gain VISIBLE detail in the final print. Overscanning and down-sampling primarily helps by averaging the noise in the scan giving a cleaner image, so It's generally a good thing to do, but it doesn't add any "detail".

    Depending on the scanner, you might not get an actual 2400 even if that's what you set into the software - regardless of what the maker claims. What scanner do you have?
    The scanner is an Epson V800. I know people say 2400 is about its maximum from what I have read

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    1,122

    Re: Scanning Resolution Question

    Quote Originally Posted by IanBarber View Post
    The scanner is an Epson V800. I know people say 2400 is about its maximum from what I have read

    If scanning beyond 2800 (say 3000) you can get true 2800 Lp/mm from the V800 in one direction, and some 2300 in the other.

    Please see http://archivehistory.jeksite.org/ch.../appendixc.htm


    Be careful because the sharp look of your image depends a lot on your Photoshop process, not only from the scanner itself.

    Edit/scan/sharp always in TIFF 16 bits and with image size larger that needed. Then save a personal copy in TIFF 16 bits. If you are edit again use this source

    Then make the image to be posted.

    > Resize the image to the final size, Image->Image size . This dialog allows you to selet the resize algorithm, (at the bottom) select "Bicubic, Ideal for reductions", this is critical !!!

    > See if unsharp masking again helps for the final look,

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Doncaster UK
    Posts
    306

    Re: Scanning Resolution Question

    Quote Originally Posted by Pere Casals View Post
    If scanning beyond 2800 (say 3000) you can get true 2800 Lp/mm from the V800 in one direction, and some 2300 in the other.

    Please see http://archivehistory.jeksite.org/ch.../appendixc.htm

    Interesting reading, thanks.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    657

    Re: Scanning Resolution Question

    Quote Originally Posted by Pere Casals View Post
    If scanning beyond 2800 (say 3000) you can get true 2800 Lp/mm from the V800 in one direction, and some 2300 in the other.
    Please see http://archivehistory.jeksite.org/ch.../appendixc.htm
    ? ? ?

    http://archivehistory.jeksite.org/ch...#_Toc326155573

    Table C.2. Epson V750 Scanner: Effective Resolutions for Various Scanner Resolution Settings.

    Scanner Resolution Setting: 3000ppi.

    Effective Resolution for Vertical Bars (Average of 5 Readings): 2255.
    (*Percent Difference from Scanner Resolution Setting: -25%).

    Effective Resolution for Horizontal Bars (Average of 5 Readings): 2148.
    (*Percent Difference from Scanner Resolution Setting: -28%).

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    1,122

    Re: Scanning Resolution Question

    Quote Originally Posted by Taija71A View Post
    ? ? ?

    http://archivehistory.jeksite.org/ch...#_Toc326155573

    Table C.2. Epson V750 Scanner: Effective Resolutions for Various Scanner Resolution Settings.

    Scanner Resolution Setting: 3000ppi.

    Effective Resolution for Vertical Bars (Average of 5 Readings): 2255.
    (*Percent Difference from Scanner Resolution Setting: -25%).

    Effective Resolution for Horizontal Bars (Average of 5 Readings): 2148.
    (*Percent Difference from Scanner Resolution Setting: -28%).

    Sorry, 3000 should be 6400, this is the table:

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	___scn.jpg 
Views:	36 
Size:	54.5 KB 
ID:	166181


    A 6400 scan can reach 2900 and 2300 , depending on the direction and the particular pass. This are max figures. A you will know in flatbeds film is not flat if not wet mounted. Then you have multipass...

    Also this test is a bit subjective as any USAF 1951 test.

    Anyway this resolving power is atonishing for 4x5, way, way more what a human eye can see in a full image. We can say that this is an obscene amount of image quality, without discussing much on technical test intrinsics.

    But a monitor has 2mpix or 8 mpix, only that, so the way you reduce the image size will be important for a sharp look, much more than the scanner.


    This is a 8x10, the bell size is like if it was in a 6m high print. Need more ??? I need way, way less !!!

    https://www.flickr.com/photos/125592...posted-public/

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Doncaster UK
    Posts
    306

    Re: Scanning Resolution Question

    A 6400 scan can reach 2900 and 2300
    Out of interest Pere, do you scan yours at 6400 knowing that in theory you will be achieving more in the region between 2300 and 2900

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    1,122

    Re: Scanning Resolution Question

    Quote Originally Posted by IanBarber View Post
    Out of interest Pere, do you scan yours at 6400 knowing that in theory you will be achieving more in the region between 2300 and 2900
    No... not necessary, only in the case I want an small crop.

    Human eyes can see some 60 mpix if moving the eye around without moving the head, a 4k monitor has 8 mpix... so why scanning 500 mpix (from 8x10).

    It is funny having such an obscene amount of image quality, I find it only useful to get fun with my digital mates... How many megapixels do you say ?


    To me LF is great because process purity, movements, long focals... that obscene amount of image quality comes as a bonus. Well, not undesired at all... true, but this is way in excess. The sharp look comes little from that "in excess" image quality, and a lot from excellent subject, execellent light, and excellent photographer.

    To me the target is to learn something from AA and Karsh...

    I get a lot of fun by measuring Lp/mm from my glasses and scans, but I know very well that this is near the least important thing in LF. The important thing is having artistic ideas to aesthetically exploit the LF look, imho. Problem is that I've a low artistic profile, perhaps that I make too many LP/mm measurements

Similar Threads

  1. Scanning Resolution
    By robertrose in forum Digital Hardware
    Replies: 50
    Last Post: 2-Apr-2015, 14:23
  2. Scanning, resolution and printing
    By Meekyman in forum Digital Processing
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 4-Feb-2013, 18:28
  3. Max scanning resolution
    By Songyun in forum Digital Hardware
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 14-Jun-2009, 05:25
  4. Scanning negatives resolution
    By bounty in forum Digital Hardware
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 4-Dec-2007, 20:18
  5. Best Scanning Resolution?
    By rmd-photography in forum Digital Processing
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 30-Aug-2007, 19:35

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •