Quote Originally Posted by Peter De Smidt View Post
How a scanner interacts with grain can be an important issue, whether or not more scene detail can be extracted from the film. My flatbed isn't an Epson, but scanning at higher resolutions with my scanner leads to a better grain rendition, even though I doubt my large format camera/lens system can achieve the corresponding level of detail on film. So for instance, you might scan a high resolution test target. It gives you a max dpi for your scanner. You might be tempted to scan at that setting, but while that might give you the smallest file size that'll lead to the maximum number of bars resolved on the target, it may not give you the best scan for other reasons, such as grain size...
IMHO grain depiction can be very important for 35mm with all films, and for MF with cubic film like TX and HP5, but IMHO that interaction has little sense for LF. You have a Cezanne, IIRC, 4x5 is scanned at 2000 dpi as a maximum with the Cezanne, and sure you have no problem with that. It would be interesting to test that with the Cezanne: if there is a difference because grain depiction with normal scanning (2000dpi) compared with stitching strips (8000dpi). This may also depend on film, perhaps depending on tabular vs cubic...

Also it should be pointed that (in the past) some Nikon LS users were complaining about too much scanner resolution that was aliased with grain...

With the Cezanne "pixel size" can be adjusted because the zoom lens, it should be a good platform to see grain vs pixel aliasing...