resolution and scaling for V700

[Rick Tardiff]

I just received a V700 and am using silverfast AI software. I am having a problem with understanding resolution and scaling. I want to create a master file from my 4x5 negative. What should I have my imput and output settings at? I set my dpi to 300 and only got a file size of 5.15mb. I am looking for a much larger file size than that. Thanks for everyones patience. Rick

[Tom Monego]

Rick,
I tend to ignore scaling, valuable if you have to fit a picture into a predefined layout but otherwise not necessary. For film 1000ppi will give you around an 8x10, 2000ppi about a 16x20, the V700 maxes out at about 3200ppi. Meaning scanning any higher res will just take more time without an increase in definition. Takes a while to scan a 4x5 at 3200ppi anyway. 300ppi is more for prints and other paper items.
I use the Epson software, only the Pro section as the home and auto border on useless. The pro level of Epson Scan works quite well, I never installed Silverscan Ai as I understand it is a crippled version of Silver Scan and really not better than Epson Scan.

Tom

[Ken Lee]

There have been many threads on this subject, on this forum. You can learn a lot by perusing them at your leisure.

Scanners like the Epson, deliver somewhere around 2100 samples per inch, even when you set them higher. Bigger files, but little appreciable data, is delivered. Shocking... but true.

Epson printers are designed to print best, in multiples of 360 dpi. So when you print, send 360dpi to them. Other scanners like Canon and HP, are optimal in increments of 300dpi - so send 300 dpi to them. (Some people will actually send 720 dpi to an Epson, but it's hard to know if there is any increase in detail. Similarly, some send 600 dpi to a Canon or HP, but whether it's an improvement, is open to discussion.)

Scan your images larger than you plan to print them. (I scan mine at 2400). Make all your adjustments to the large image. When it's time to print, down-size, and sharpen last.

Scan your images, and perform adjustments to them, in 16-bits per channel color space. That's 48-bit color, or 16-bit grayscale. Even though the printers are 8-bit, you postpone the loss of subtle shading, until the end.

Try to perform as many adjustments as you can, as layers. They are lossless, and can be un-done.

If your machine is slow, or low in RAM, you can still make great images using the "Guide File Workflow", described in this video podcast: http://www.westcoastimaging.com/wci/page/info/photoshoptip/podcast_guidefile.html

If none of this makes sense, then become acquainted with the nuts and bolts of image size, dpi, spi, etc. There are countless free Photoshop tutorials on the web, which explain how these numbers work together.

[Don Wilkes]

Tom: The Silverfast included with the V750 is not in any way crippled; it's the real deal. You should give it a whirl...

\donw

[Lenny Eiger]

Epson printers are designed to print best, in multiples of 360 dpi. So when you print, send 360dpi to them. Other scanners like Canon and HP, are optimal in increments of 300dpi - so send 300 dpi to them. (Some people will actually send 720 dpi to an Epson, but it's hard to know if there is any increase in detail. Similarly, some send 600 dpi to a Canon or HP, but whether it's an improvement, is open to discussion.)

Ken, All of your other advice in your post seemed like good ideas and suggestions but the quote above I have not found to be true. I think all the resizing is a waste of time and find that there is no benefit in sending anything but whatever you have.... I print by resizing to the image size without resampling at all and I find that works as well as anything else.

I can see the difference is 360 vs 720, one can see it a little better in using b&w inks vs color, but it is very slight. Most people wouldn't even see it...

I don't know who started these rumors about the 360 but I don't think they hold up in real world testing. that's been my experience anyway....

Lenny

[Jeremy Moore]

Some people will actually send 720 dpi to an Epson, but it's hard to know if there is any increase in detail. Similarly, some send 600 dpi to a Canon or HP, but whether it's an improvement, is open to discussion.)

I printed a vector-based resolution chart at 180, 240, 300, 360, 480, 540, and 720 with my Epson 7800. I then looked at these charts by eye and under a microscope in a blind test. Based on the empirical results from looking at the resultant physical prints I send files at 360ppi to my Epson.

It's *really* easy to know if there is any increase in detail--you make prints of a highly detailed image (or a resolution chart if you wish) and look at them under magnification.

Get other people to look at them under magnification if you want a broader consensus. Make it a blind test where you write on the back what they are and when you do all of the inspecting have them shuffled up and don't look at the back, just lay them down in sharpness order and then check the back.

This test takes a couple of sheets of paper (or if you're printing from a roll barely any paper at all as you can make the test image 4" square or so) and maybe an hour of time (less if you don't have to swing them under a microscope). I did my test based on print-sniffers because I am one myself which was the reason for the microscope.

[Ken Lee]

According to the Epson web site,

"All Epson large format printers use 360dpi as the input resolution"

See http://files.support.epson.com/pdf/pro16p/pro16pps.pdf
(files.support.epson.com/pdf/pro16p/pro16pps.pdf)
See ftp.epson.com/pdf/pro7k_/pro7k_ps.pdf

[Lenny Eiger]

According to the Epson web site,

"All Epson large format printers use 360dpi as the input resolution"


1) I don't believe anything Epson tells me. They are full of it. They make printers that print well but do not play nice in their arena. They have ulterior motives.

2) They have been totally secret about the "black box" that images go into and no one outside of their engineers (including the people that write these pdfs") knows what actually happens.

3) If the information were true then why do images look different at higher resolutions than 360?

4) Even if they were correct, then they would clip the images down to 360 dpi and then rasterize. It wouldn't matter what you sent the image to the printer at as long as it was over 360, the driver would take it down to 360. So why bother to downsize the image to 360 if the driver is going to do it... it's an extra step.

I suspect there are specific sets of resolutions that they use, rather than just 360 or 720. I'm sure they round things a bit, perhaps every 10 or 25 increments - that would make some sense from a programming standpoint.

Lenny

[8x10 user]

I don't know much about these printers but I thought that the new Epson's are capable of printing 360 pixel's / halftones per inch while using a maximum hardware resolution of up to 1440 x 2880 dots per inch to produce each pixel / halftone.

[Tom Monego]

Tom: The Silverfast included with the V750 is not in any way crippled; it's the real deal. You should give it a whirl...

\donw

Yes but the OP was saying a V700, I guess full Silverfast one more thing you get for the extra $250. The Ai version that comes with the V700 is not much different than Epson Scan. Never used the full version, understand it has some image enhancing features like multiple scans.

Tom

[Lenny Eiger]

I don't know much about these printers but I thought that the new Epson's are capable of printing 360 pixel's / halftones per inch by using a maximum hardware resolution of 1440 x 2880 dots per inch.

That's not exactly how it works... Those numbers aren't really connected in the way you are probably imagining them... One has to do with the number of pixels that are being reproduced and the other has to do with the pattern that the printer lays down.

There are plenty of times (not always) where more resolution is possible at a printer setting of 720x1440 vs the the higher numbers. It has to do with driver or RIP being used, the inkset and the software settings.

Lenny