What Input Resolution for BW Negative?

[RedSun]

Sorry if this is a repeat. What input do you use for BW negatives? Both 4x5 and 120 roll films. Use the max optical resolution of the scanner? Or too much waste of storage?

[Lenny Eiger]

I use the max. But the question is incomplete. For what purpose? Are you scanning for printing? What gives you the idea that the max optical is too much quality - for what medium?

Lenny

[Preston]

I use the max on my scanner, too. You can always resample a duplicate of your scan file for a print or the Web. In my opinion, you should consider getting the highest quality scan your hardware will deliver, and if you're short on storage space, consider upgrading your storage system.

--P

[SergeiR]

Sorry if this is a repeat. What input do you use for BW negatives? Both 4x5 and 120 roll films. Use the max optical resolution of the scanner? Or too much waste of storage?

yes. Waste it is. Newer flatbeds peak at around 2400-3200, others - at lower. No point in quadrupling file sizes to squeeze out mythic 6400dpi. There are datasheets on this very site, that you can check.

[Lenny Eiger]

yes. Waste it is. Newer flatbeds peak at around 2400-3200, others - at lower. No point in quadrupling file sizes to squeeze out mythic 6400dpi. There are datasheets on this very site, that you can check.

He did say max optical, vs just max.

FWIW, just so the numbers are all there, the Aztek Premier scanner has a max optical of close to 8,000. Most of the other drum scanners are at 4,000, some higher, some lower. The lower numbers you specify are just for the consumer flatbeds...

Lenny

[SergeiR]

He did say max optical, vs just max.

FWIW, just so the numbers are all there, the Aztek Premier scanner has a max optical of close to 8,000. Most of the other drum scanners are at 4,000, some higher, some lower. The lower numbers you specify are just for the consumer flatbeds...

Lenny

correct. As mentioned in my post i do talk about flatbeds. Which is what i suspect OT is asking about. Overwise post would be "whohooo.. i scored drum scanner, what i should run it at".. or just do search.

[RedSun]

Sorry I did not make it clear. I use both a Epson flatbed (4990) and a Minolta 5400 35mm film scanner. Since this is a LF forum, I did not want to make this a 35mm discussion.

Well, the Minolta can do 5400 optical (as far as I know). a BW scan is already 37MB and a color scan is 111MB. Although storage is cheap these days, but with this pace, the HD can be filled up quickly. In additional to scans, I have digital images, videos, etc.... I'm not sure exactly how large the 4x5 can get, but it should be larger than the 35mm scans. Everything adds up.

I guess we need all the resolutions for SF, but do we need the max optical resolution for LF? Or the other question: at what optical resolution a 4x5 scan still prints well at 20" by 25" large?

[Frank Petronio]

You scan it at the max the flatbed can do and resample it down to 20x25 @ 360dpi.

Of course the best way to know your optimum is to try a few scans and prints at different rezs and see for yourself. Nothing beats actually doing it and then you'll know for sure.

[Lenny Eiger]

Sorry I did not make it clear. I use both a Epson flatbed (4990) and a Minolta 5400 35mm film scanner. Since this is a LF forum, I did not want to make this a 35mm discussion.

Well, the Minolta can do 5400 optical (as far as I know). a BW scan is already 37MB and a color scan is 111MB.

Two things. A Minolta can NOT do 5400 optical. Reality is in the 2000-2500 range. Just because something can generate that many pixels does not mean that the optical capturing system is that good. Only the Eversmart Supreme claims that much in a flatbed, and most drum scanners can do about 4000, with one or two at the 8000 level.

Although storage is cheap these days, but with this pace, the HD can be filled up quickly. In additional to scans, I have digital images, videos, etc.... I'm not sure exactly how large the 4x5 can get, but it should be larger than the 35mm scans. Everything adds up.

No, it doesn't. 4 Terabyte drives are now around $300. You can get an inexpensive case and put two of them in there, one for backup and have a lot of storage that will last for a lot of what you could do for some time.

I guess we need all the resolutions for SF, but do we need the max optical resolution for LF? Or the other question: at what optical resolution a 4x5 scan still prints well at 20" by 25" large?

The arithmetic is simpler than you might imagine. If you multiply the 25 inches by 360 (=9000) you get the number of pixels you need for the longest edge. When you go to a scanner, you set the ppi to the size of the original x the number of pixels you need to get to 9000 total. (Or 9000 / size of the original.)

For 4x5, that's 2000 ppi. (Will get you 10,000 pixels on the 5 inch edge). For 35mm that's 9000/1.5 or 6000ppi.

That's why people use drum scanners like the Aztek Premier, with its 8,000 optical rez, to do 35mm. ICG 380 also has some good rez. They are more sensitive and the images are sharp when they are scanned, vs needing additional sharpening. The smaller the film, the better of a scanner you need. It is a good reason to use 4x5, 5x7 or 8x10.

Lenny

[SURF]

Hi Lenny,

Two things. A Minolta can NOT do 5400 optical. Reality is in the 2000-2500 range.

I have seen USAF resolution target scanned by Minolta and it is impressive. Depending on the scan direction numbers differ from 4000 dpi to 5000 dpi. And it is REAL.

That's why people use drum scanners like the Aztek Premier, with its 8,000 optical rez, to do 35mm. ICG 380 also has some good rez.

And this is not real to me till somebody bother to scan film copy of the USAF target. I know those scanners can make a great scans. (If it is in perfect condition and operator knows the things.)