I recently bought a Epson V700 scanner. My question is this. Is the resolution you see on the screen going to be the same as when you print it? I've scanned a tack sharp neg at 400 dpi and 4800 dpi and can't tell the difference between them. I had the same neg scanned and printed at a lab to a 5x7 and the neg is amazingly sharp what is the deal?
you work it out backwards.
Say you want a 20x16 inch print. You need 360 pixels per inch (on an epson) for approx 7 line pairs per millimeter in the print which is high quality. So 20x360 = 7200 pixels width required across the print. So your scan needs to scan to produce a file 7200 pixels wide. So if you have a 35mm neg, that is 36mm wide, then you need to scan at: (36mm = 1.42 inches) 7200 / 1.42 = 5070 dpi to get a file size big enough to print a 20x16 at 360ppi.
Your screen is much lower resolution and is probably around 90 pixels per inch. So if you view the scanned file at 100%, it will be stretched out and look soft. If you view it at print size, then it will be an iterpretation at approx 90ppi so will still look soft. Only when you print will you be able to see its true resolution.
many people say you only need 300ppi print resolution and others say you can't tell the difference over 200ppi. Take your pick and do the maths above substituting your print size and your neg size and your required print resolution.
"I recently bought a Epson V700 scanner. My question is this. Is the resolution you see on the screen going to be the same as when you print it?"
No. The resolution of your monitor will normally be much less than the resolution of your print.
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.
Your monitor rez will between 72 and 96ppi on average. That means if you scan at 4800ppi X 5inches on the wide side, you’ll have 24000 pixels wide in your scan. Even at a screen rez of 96ppi, viewing at 100% is like looking at a print nearly 21 feet wide.
Something to keep in mind is that the V700 has a true resolution of approx 2050 to 2150ppi. You won’t find much of any advantage to scanning over 2400ppi on the Epson. Doing that will give you an uninterpolated 360dpi print out to 33” wide. Only when the better optics kick in at 6400 ppi does the rez step up to a real 2400ppi or so. The problem is that you’ll be working with a 4.9gb file to get it. Not worth it in my experience!
Dear Dave, how many ppi would I need for a GOOD 16x20 b&w print. I am scanning 4x5 negs,and trans.
What rez is that?
When I print on an Epson, I usually use 360 ppi, but you can get by with less.
Scan at 2400, then you will have some room for cropping.
I send everything to my Epson 3800 at 360ppi. From a 2400ppi scan, I get just less than 12,000 pixels. I do all my work on the native size file, and then downsample with bicubic to 360ppi for a 16x20. There is no point in feeding more to the print driver as you won't get any better results.Originally Posted by ignatiusjk
Hope that helps.
The reason is optical resolution. This is the problem I have always had with this scanner. One needs to make a distinction between the number of pixels a scanner can generate and how many bars it can actually resolve. This is similar to using 8x10 film with a pinhole camera. The pinhole image isn't going to be any sharper by virtue of it being taken with an 8x10.
The optical resolution of an Epson scanner is likely around 900-1000 (there is some disagreement here). It's true that your image won't improve at 4800, as it won't go past 1000. It's akin to interpolating, which doesn't actually help, in my opinion (or on my equipment).
I sell scanning services, so my bias can be up front here... but you can't get a horse to run in the Indy 500. You probably have a lot invested in cameras, more in good glass. You're doing it a disservice (as you have discovered) with a cheap scanner.
Lenny
EigerStudios.com
Re: scanning question
Lenny,
What is your opinion of the CoolScan 9000?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks