Page 2 of 12 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 119

Thread: Scanning Resolution Question

  1. #11

    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Doncaster UK
    Posts
    627

    Re: Scanning Resolution Question

    I get a lot of fun by measuring Lp/mm from my glasses and scans, but I know very well that this is near the least important thing in LF. The important thing is having artistic ideas to aesthetically exploit the LF look, imho. Problem is that I've a low artistic profile, perhaps that I make too much LP/mm measurements
    You havent mentioned what scanner you use Piere, is it one of the Epson V series or something else.

    If it's an Epson V series, apart from measuring Lp/mm have you spent any time experimenting with film to platen distance

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    4,566

    Re: Scanning Resolution Question

    Quote Originally Posted by IanBarber View Post
    You havent mentioned what scanner you use Piere, is it one of the Epson V series or something else.

    e

    I use a V850, of course. IMHO the best choice for a not Pro.

    Perhaps a pro may desire another device (or not), if one is scanning 8hours a day one may want something more expensive, but for the price the V800 is an atonishing machine.

    See flickr... you will see true artists using it, some use a $3000 Universal Heliar lens, but a V700.

    If one invests a lot of money one can get slightly better results with other machines but only in some circumstances, like velvia slides with deep shadows, but a true difference for that is a drum, or a Hassy X1.

    For most shots results will depend much more on your post process skills than on scanner, this is including color shots.

    If you have a V800/850 you have more than one can desire, really.



    Quote Originally Posted by IanBarber View Post
    film flatness, scanner
    This is important for 35mm film, you need to obtain best from that little frame. For LF it is mostly irrelevant, as one has an obscene amount of image quality, anyway. In some cases you may want a 4m high print that can be seen at reading distance with no flaw. In that case you need a good scan, but again postprocess may be more important than hardware (IMHO).

    Exception is Velvia/provia with very deep & interesting shadows... there you need a drum.

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Nashville
    Posts
    610

    Re: Scanning Resolution Question

    Quote Originally Posted by Pere Casals View Post
    I use a V850, of course. IMHO the best choice for a not Pro.

    Perhaps a pro may desire another device (or not), if one is scanning 8hours a day one may want something more expensive, but for the price the V800 is an atonishing machine.

    See flickr... you will see true artists using it, some use a $3000 Universal Heliar lens, but a V700.

    If one invests a lot of money one can get slightly better results with other machines but only in some circumstances, like velvia slides with deep shadows, but a true difference for that is a drum, or a Hassy X1.

    For most shots results will depend much more on your post process skills than on scanner, this is including color shots.

    If you have a V800/850 you have more than one can desire, really.

    This is important for 35mm film, you need to obtain best from that little frame. For LF it is mostly irrelevant, as one has an obscene amount of image quality, anyway. In some cases you may want a 4m high print that can be seen at reading distance with no flaw. In that case you need a good scan, but again postprocess may be more important than hardware (IMHO).

    Exception is Velvia/provia with very deep & interesting shadows... there you need a drum.
    For 35mm, a scan resolution of 2300 is insufficient for anything but web images and small prints. 2300 will not resolve the grain. You are much better off with a dedicated film scanner at half the cost of the V850. The V850 is a fine scanner for large format.

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Doncaster UK
    Posts
    627

    Re: Scanning Resolution Question

    For LF it is mostly irrelevant, as one has an obscene amount of image quality, anyway
    For 35mm, a scan resolution of 2300 is insufficient for anything but web images and small prints. 2300 will not resolve the grain. You are much better off with a dedicated film scanner at half the cost of the V850.
    What are your thoughts on say 6x6 negatives, would you say 2300 is sufficient for negatives of that size.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Nashville
    Posts
    610

    Re: Scanning Resolution Question

    Quote Originally Posted by IanBarber View Post
    What are your thoughts on say 6x6 negatives, would you say 2300 is sufficient for negatives of that size.
    I haven't scanned medium format, so I can't speak from experience.

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    4,566

    Re: Scanning Resolution Question

    Quote Originally Posted by faberryman View Post
    For 35mm, a scan resolution of 2300 is insufficient for anything but web images and small prints. 2300 will not resolve the grain. You are much better off with a dedicated film scanner at half the cost of the V850. The V850 is a fine scanner for large format.
    I agree, for 35mm it is better a dedicated roll film scanner.

    Anyway with 2300 dpi optical performance you can get very decent 60x40 cm prints from 35 mm film. For some fllms grain is not an issue, TMX has little grain, an TX grain it is easily resolved.

    But it is true that to get a decent scan from 35mm/V850 film flatness is way more important than with 4x5.


    Also think that "web images" as a low requirement has changed. Today people starts having even 4k monitors an a fast internet connection. The term "web images" was coined in the 800x600 and 1024x768 era. Today monitors have 8x more pixels and connection speed is no problem.

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    4,566

    Re: Scanning Resolution Question

    Quote Originally Posted by IanBarber View Post
    What are your thoughts on say 6x6 negatives, would you say 2300 is sufficient for negatives of that size.
    This is a 35mm scan I made with v850 : https://www.flickr.com/photos/125592...posted-public/ just click to enlarge to aparent 1m.

    These are a 6x6 V700 scans

    https://www.flickr.com/photos/558734...7631623052598/

    https://www.flickr.com/photos/558734...7631623052598/

    To me, more than enough.

    I reiterate, post process is way more important than scanner, in most situations.

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Glasgow
    Posts
    1,009

    Re: Scanning Resolution Question

    What matters is not the headline 'resolution' but the quality of that resolution. In other words, is it in focus, as free as possible from optical flaws, with adequate dmax for the media being scanned, etc? The Epson fails all too easily on those.

    This is where the reliance on optical resolution charts falls down. There is a considerable difference between a USAF standard resolution target & a piece of BW or colour neg or transparency film in terms of what needs to be adequately imaged.

    If you are considering dropping 3K on a lens, you'd be better off finding a used drum scanner with that cash.

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    4,566

    Re: Scanning Resolution Question

    Quote Originally Posted by interneg View Post
    The Epson fails all too easily on those.

    This is where the reliance on optical resolution charts falls down. There is a considerable difference between a USAF standard resolution target & a piece of BW or colour neg or transparency film in terms of what needs to be adequately imaged.

    If you are considering dropping 3K on a lens, you'd be better off finding a used drum scanner with that cash.
    People that had a drum and a V750 made 95% of the work with the Epson. For most shots it is simply not worth the drum required wet mounting for the results.

    Density is not near a problem with BW and color negative film.

    For slides one may use Multiexposure feature for deep shadows, but beyond 3.0D (and this is a lot) no flatbed do it well, real difference is a drum.


    Drum vs V750 crops



    At the level one can see a difference no enlargement is good...

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Tucson AZ
    Posts
    1,822

    Re: Scanning Resolution Question

    I was using an Epson 750 and kept debating what to upgrade to. I looked into Drum scanners and finally wound up getting an IQsmart 2 flatbed. So far I'm completely satisfied with it. I use it for everything from Minox to 8 x 10. The workflow is vastly simpler and it can do a very credible job of scanning prints as well.

    I also have a Coolscan 8000. It was quite nice for MF, but unfortunately it broke a plastic part and I haven't been able to find a replacement. Fortunately it failed shortly after I installed the IQsmart. However, the workflow with the IQsmart is easier that with the Nikon since you can put a whole roll of film on the bed, select the photos you want to scan, and let it run all night on its own.

Similar Threads

  1. Scanning Resolution
    By robertrose in forum Digital Hardware
    Replies: 50
    Last Post: 2-Apr-2015, 14:23
  2. Scanning, resolution and printing
    By Meekyman in forum Digital Processing
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 4-Feb-2013, 18:28
  3. Max scanning resolution
    By Songyun in forum Digital Hardware
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 14-Jun-2009, 05:25
  4. Scanning negatives resolution
    By bounty in forum Digital Hardware
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 4-Dec-2007, 20:18
  5. Best Scanning Resolution?
    By rmd-photography in forum Digital Processing
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 30-Aug-2007, 19:35

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
  •