Help: how to scale output with Silverfast ???

[hassiman]

Hi,

I have been try to figure out what should be simple... but for some reason seems to be about impossible. I was wondering if any other SilverFast AI Studio/CoolScan 9000 user has figured it out.

I am scanning 35mm and 6X6 transparencies. I would like to scan for maximum quality/enlargement size. I mostly scan full-frame with little or no cropping.
I am trying to figure out what settings to use to scan at the Nikon 9000 scanner's maximum optical quality without interpolation. The Silverfast techs have said that 4000 dpi is actually over the true optical resolution for the 9000 and suggested that 3600 was a more realistic figure.. maybe even 3000 dpi.

I am scanning using the 48 Bit Color setting. Not HDR.

In SilverFast's "frame" options field:

I have set both "scale %" fields at 100.0

I must assume that the data in the "original" fields is generated by the dimensions of the cropping frame on the image preview.

I have tried to set the output fields... but I am not sure how it works.

My Q factor is set at 1.5 with "screen" reading 2400

The dpi figure I have typed in as 3600 as the slider will not give me that figure.

Does anyone know the magic formula or input sequence I need to follow generate maximum quality scans from 35mm and 6X6 transparencies?

[Tyler Boley]

They may have topped their bizarre color management settings nomenclature with this stuff. Maybe they are trying to insure Silverfast workshop sign-ups as an additional income resource. I've been using this software for a very long time and it never ceases to amuse me, to put it lightly.
I don't think scanner software is the place to do any scaling at all, far better tools in Photoshop if you are going to re-res anything. I set it at 100%, and pick an appropriate native scanner ppi for the file I need. Q factor (huh?) is out of the game when using the software in this manner.

For example, 4000ppi is the highest native res my scanner offers, so a 35mm image is about 1" x 1.5" at 4000 ppi coming into Photoshop.

Resizing, when and how, is another complex thread.

Tyler

[hassiman]

Dear Tyler,

Re-sizing is really not the issue. As simple as it seems, all I am trying to do is figure out how to in put the data I need to give me that best quality possible output file of a given image. One that will print as large as feasible given the limitations of the CoolScan 9000's native optical resolving power. Up and down rezing is not an issue as I will be printing through Qimage which will automatically up/down rez and sharpen on the fly at the printer (Epson 3800)

Essentially I want to know how to set Silverfast to give me the highest quality non-interpolated output file the 9000 is capable of every image I scan and even after talking with the SilverFast folks no-one seems to have a system down... at least that they have been willing to share. I think that one problem with SliverFast might be the language barrier as all of their support folks are in. Germany.

[Walter Calahan]

"The Silverfast techs have said that 4000 dpi is actually over the true optical resolution for the 9000 and suggested that 3600 was a more realistic figure.. maybe even 3000 dpi."

That's news to me. I simply use 4000 ppi.

As I've said my personal e-mails to you, simpler the better. Do all your heavy lifting in Photoshop. I've used Silverfast at 4000 ppi for 35 mm & medium format, and have successfully scales up in Photoshop to print on my Epson 9600. I've made beautiful prints on 44" watercolor paper.

I'm still going to send you some personal e-mails once I have a chance to get on my desktop machine. Unfortunately with Mother's Day weekend here, my wife has reminded me of why my life is not my own. Ha ha ha ha.

Stay tuned.

[Tyler Boley]

Dear Tyler,

...
Essentially I want to know how to set Silverfast to give me the highest quality non-interpolated output file the 9000 is capable of every image...

Got it, you're a bit ahead of me. That's essentially what I was recommending anyway. I'd still stick with 100% @ 4000, and the other settings should be out of the loop.
I'll have to double check tomorrow at the studio.

Regarding true native res of your scanner, that's probably a valid issue. But what is called for in the settings and how it performs are different issues, relevant now being what settings returns the best results, regardless of whether reality meets specs.

My understanding, at least with Silverfast and my scanner, is that there is a specific set of native hardware resolutions, which will be returned unaltered, and if a scale/ppi setting is called for that is between any of those, the software will resize on the fly.
I'm wary of all of that, and so 100% at any native res, and except for special circumstances, let the RIP scale as it sees fit as you are doing. A lot of testing has resulted in that conclusion.
Tyler

[Kirk Gittings]

A couple of observations. If you scan above the true optical resolution, the only real penalty is perhaps an unnecessarily large file size for your purposes. Its not like resolution degrades above the optical resolution. But true optical resolution is a good thing to know, because it defines the acceptable print size limits from your scanner and film. Though I never tested it actually, 3000 for the 9000 or 8000 seems a little bit low to me. similar to Tyler, I don't ever print large so I always scan at 100% at 2400.

One of the good things about the Nikons is that they have superior step motors than the consumer flatbeds, making the SF multi-pass and multi-exposure features more usable because the different passes give similar sized scans making the blend sharper.

[Tyler Boley]

Kirk, my only reservation with scanner software upscaling, is that there are probably better ways. Photoshop's various algorythms, and some 3rd party plugins give more options and sophistication. Testing would make it more certain, and I also find different images may require different methods.
Tyler

[Kirk Gittings]

Tyler, If I was not clear, I was not disagreeing with you per se. I don't think. Just to be clear, the true optical resolution is not fixed in the software and if you scan above it, it does not necessarily mean you are uprezing? Right? But what is that point where a given scanner/software combination starts to uprez? I don't know. Is it at the manufacturers claimed optical resolution? Like 4800 on an Epson 750?

[Tyler Boley]

Kirk, for a file larger then what 100% at max native ppi, it has to be uprezing. Pretty sure Silverfast even has a preference setting for what kind of resampling algorythm to use.
But I suspect I'm missing your real question? Happens a lot... poor reading skills...
Tyler

[Kirk Gittings]

Ok here it is. If my computer could handle it on an Epson 750, theoretically SF and the Epson software would let me scan a 4x5, 100% at 12800 dpi. Epson specs the scanner at a max of 6400 (hardware resolution, we all know true optical resolution is closer to 2000). So at what point is the software simply uprezing, I assume anywhere above 6400? I never scan at teses sizes so I have never paid any attention really to anything but real optical resolution.

Optical Resolution

* Epson Dual Lens System, 4800 dpi and 6400 dpi

Hardware Resolution

* 4800 x 9600 dpi, 6400 x 9600 dpi with Micro Step Drive™ technology

Maximum Resolution

* 12,800 x 12,800 dpi with software interpolation

Effective Pixels

* 40,800 x 56,160 (4800 dpi), 37,760 x 62,336 (6400dpi)