Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15

Thread: silverfast scanning

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    western ma
    Posts
    34

    silverfast scanning

    I know this subject has been discussed many times, but I am an old guy trying to learn with this new technology. I am useing an epson 4990 with silverfast AI 6.4 then on to photoshop. I am scanning tri x 4x5 with settings in silverfast as follows:
    scan type 48 bit color, output size 16 x 12.7. If I set the dpi which I assume is the same as ppi at 300 I get a file size of 104.75 mbytes, at 600 dpi file size is 419.02 mbytes, at 1200 file size is 1676 mbytes. I have tried the 1200 setting and the computer told me I didn't have enough RAM. I have 2 gig of ram. I have read on previous threads of scanning at 2400 ppi. Totally confused. Any help would be appreciated.

    Walterb

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    4

    Re: silverfast scanning

    It's all an issue of scaling. Silverfast conveniently does the math for you so you don't have to worry about it. If your final output size is 16x12.7 you'll want to choose a dpi that you would like to print at. 300 is generally considered to be the sweet spot, but in my experience anywhere from 180 to 360 is fine depending on the application and printer. Anything beyond that is overkill and a waste of your time and computer's resources.

    Let's do some quick math. We'll assume nice round numbers here to make it easy. Say you want to scan your 4x5 to make an 8x10 print. We know that 300dpi is our goal. So we could scan this neg in a couple different ways. 1) Tell Silverfast you want an 8x10 (output size) @ 300dpi. You'll get a file that is 2400x3000 pixels (8x300=2400, 10x300=3000). 2) Leave your output size at 100% but set your dpi to 600. You'll get a file that is 2400x3000 pixels (4x600=2400, 5x600=3000). The same as before. Open said file in photoshop and change the Image Size to 8x10 @ 300dpi. The file does not change...it is still 2400x3000 pixels. If you're still confused try looking here for a more in depth explanation.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    4

    Re: silverfast scanning

    A couple more things...

    When people recommend scanning @ 2400dpi what they mean is to leave the scaling alone (default 100% or ouptut size the same as the input size) and resize in PS as needed. The philosophy here is to scan once at the highest resolution that your particular scanner is capable of and you won't have to scan again later if you decide you want a larger print at some later date. Not bad advice if you have the computer horsepower for it, but leave your scaling to 100%. Of course, if you're scanning 48bit color, your going to have a hard time handling that file cause it will be huge.

    My advice, since you are new, just stick to scanning for your final desired print size at 300dpi and be happy. You may have to rescan a few negs down the road, but the practice could actually be good for you. For what it's worth, if you're printing much beyond 16x20, you'll probably not want to use your scans from your 4990 anyway. If you are printing large, invest in a professional scan...you'll be much happier.

    Eric

  4. #4
    Joanna Carter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Plestin-les-Grèves, France
    Posts
    991

    Re: silverfast scanning

    Quote Originally Posted by walterb View Post
    I know this subject has been discussed many times, but I am an old guy trying to learn with this new technology. I am useing an epson 4990 with silverfast AI 6.4 then on to photoshop. I am scanning tri x 4x5 with settings in silverfast as follows:
    scan type 48 bit color, output size 16 x 12.7. If I set the dpi which I assume is the same as ppi at 300 I get a file size of 104.75 mbytes, at 600 dpi file size is 419.02 mbytes, at 1200 file size is 1676 mbytes. I have tried the 1200 setting and the computer told me I didn't have enough RAM. I have 2 gig of ram. I have read on previous threads of scanning at 2400 ppi. Totally confused. Any help would be appreciated.
    1. Are you using Windows or a Mac?

    2. If you are using Windows, which version?

    3. How much spare disk space do you have?

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Dec 1997
    Location
    Baraboo, Wisconsin
    Posts
    7,695

    Re: silverfast scanning

    Why are you scanning b&w film as color? Some years ago that used to be recommended by some people but IMHO it was of questionable value even back then with 4x5 and in any event has been rendered unnecessary by later technology. Forget the color, scan it as 16 bit b&w and right off the bat you'll have a huge reduction in file size. You're also pushing what IMHO are the limits of quality prints from 4990 scans at your print size. I'd scale back a little at first, maybe to roughly 11x14, then work your way up if necessary.
    Brian Ellis
    Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you do criticize them you'll be
    a mile away and you'll have their shoes.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    246

    Re: silverfast scanning

    Are you by chance using the ICE feature? If so, try turning it off and you might find it then allows you to make the scan. Just a thought because the same issue shows up with medium format scans at high resolutions when ICE is turned on. Turning ICE off often makes the issue go away.

    Doug
    ---
    www.BetterScanning.com

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    western ma
    Posts
    34

    Re: silverfast scanning

    joanna

    I have windows xp with about 280 gbytes of free space.

    walter b

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    western ma
    Posts
    34

    Re: silverfast scanning

    Quote Originally Posted by ostreet View Post
    A couple more things...

    When people recommend scanning @ 2400dpi what they mean is to leave the scaling alone (default 100% or ouptut size the same as the input size) and resize in PS as needed. The philosophy here is to scan once at the highest resolution that your particular scanner is capable of and you won't have to scan again later if you decide you want a larger print at some later date. Not bad advice if you have the computer horsepower for it, but leave your scaling to 100%. Of course, if you're scanning 48bit color, your going to have a hard time handling that file cause it will be huge.

    My advice, since you are new, just stick to scanning for your final desired print size at 300dpi and be happy. You may have to rescan a few negs down the road, but the practice could actually be good for you. For what it's worth, if you're printing much beyond 16x20, you'll probably not want to use your scans from your 4990 anyway. If you are printing large, invest in a professional scan...you'll be much happier.

    Eric
    Thanks, Now I understand I appreciate your help
    Walter

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    western ma
    Posts
    34

    Re: silverfast scanning

    Quote Originally Posted by Joanna Carter View Post
    1. Are you using Windows or a Mac?

    2. If you are using Windows, which version?

    3. How much spare disk space do you have?
    I am using windows xp with about 280 g bytes of spare space wit most of this on an external hard drive.

    walter

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    western ma
    Posts
    34

    Re: silverfast scanning

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian Ellis View Post
    Why are you scanning b&w film as color? Some years ago that used to be recommended by some people but IMHO it was of questionable value even back then with 4x5 and in any event has been rendered unnecessary by later technology. Forget the color, scan it as 16 bit b&w and right off the bat you'll have a huge reduction in file size. You're also pushing what IMHO are the limits of quality prints from 4990 scans at your print size. I'd scale back a little at first, maybe to roughly 11x14, then work your way up if necessary.
    I was under the impression scanning in color was the way to go. I will scale back to
    b&w and reduce the file size.

    Thanks for the helpful info.

    walter

Similar Threads

  1. SilverFast AI/ Epson V750 height adjustment
    By aporodagon in forum Digital Hardware
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 25-Dec-2010, 09:36
  2. New Silverfast feature in 6.5 - Multi Exposure Scanning
    By Henry Ambrose in forum Digital Processing
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 29-Sep-2007, 19:52
  3. NegPos vs. Silverfast HDR
    By Chad Shindel in forum Digital Processing
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 31-Jul-2006, 23:36
  4. Scanning Workflow
    By neil poulsen in forum Digital Processing
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 8-Feb-2006, 11:05
  5. Problems scanning B&W in Silverfast Ai/4870
    By Jeffrey Sipress in forum Digital Hardware
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 24-Oct-2005, 14:34

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
  •