Page 3 of 9 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 90

Thread: DSLR scanning vs Dedicated flatbed scanning.

  1. #21
    Tin Can's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    12,307

    Re: DSLR scanning vs Dedicated flatbed scanning.

    I once and only once had a Pro Drum Scan of two 35mm slides.

    Drop off in Chicago, maybe 2003. High end joint.

    $60 wasted on crap.

    Now I use the Nikon film copy attachment, Nikon PB5 Bellows + PS4 Copier.
    sin eater

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Reykjavk, Iceland
    Posts
    71

    Re: DSLR scanning vs Dedicated flatbed scanning.

    Hi Pere,
    I am sorry, but I just got back from shooting and it is 2:45am in the arctic morning, so I do not follow your math, nor am I frankly all that interested in it, in so far as it relates to the practical side of photography. I know that the Leica 120mm macro renders razor sharp detail across the frame on the 37mp non AA filtered CCD of the Leica S, even at nearly wide open apertures. I also know that Peter Karbe at Leica is one of the better lens designers around, and he has stated that the Leica S lenses are designed to resolve 100mp. Given that it is the best of all of them, I do not doubt that the 120mm can do so. I agree that vibration and stability are totally critical in making high resolution photos. Using the same lens on both bodies, the multi shot has advantages compared to the single shot of the S1, but it does not seem to achieve a true 100mp. I think this is most likely less a stability issue than an issue with the precision of the sensor shift mechanism and the stitching of the resulting images.

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    58

    Re: DSLR scanning vs Dedicated flatbed scanning.

    Thanks for all the great info.

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    4,211

    Re: DSLR scanning vs Dedicated flatbed scanning.

    Quote Originally Posted by StuartR View Post
    Peter Karbe at Leica .... Leica S lenses are designed to resolve 100mp. Given that it is the best of all of them, I do not doubt that the 120mm can do so.
    Looking to datasheets it's a good lens:

    MTF at 5, 10, 20, and 40 lp/mm

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	leica.jpg 
Views:	3 
Size:	46.8 KB 
ID:	192479

    Page 29: https://www.fotoskoda.cz/images-old/...rochure_en.pdf

    The Leica S is just half the surface of the 645 film format. Analyzing this system is quite interesting, it is a good system but nothing far from current Nikon D850 and the like, IMHO.

    Anyway we don't requiere expensive cameras and lenses to make a powerful DSLR scanner, we always can stitch more shots.
    Last edited by Pere Casals; 16-Jun-2019 at 15:15.

  5. #25

    Re: DSLR scanning vs Dedicated flatbed scanning.

    I'm doing camera scanning with the Pentax K-1 II and using pixel shift (aka multi shot). It's a subtle difference, but once you do post processing on the scan the image is much cleaner and more resolved. I've done quite a lot of scanning in my time and I'm not going back to traditional CCD line scanners, or getting a drum scanner.

    These are already enough for my 24" P6000 printer. Drum scanners, flextights, and cool scans are just getting older, while camera scanning rigs get better every year.

  6. #26

    Re: DSLR scanning vs Dedicated flatbed scanning.

    I'll also add that there is an IMO misconception that more resolution is always better. I've seen the discussions about resolving the actual grain clumps, etc... I am of the opinion that your desired output is really all that matters.

    Example: When it comes to 4x5 I can get a 16x20 print at 300ppi with a single capture using a D810. I have done this actually with Provia 100F, printed with an Epson P6000. The print looks...stunning! Just as you would expect from Provia in that size, there is no visible grain, just detail. Plus I was able to recover significant shadow information due to the latitude of the CMOS capture.

    Now as I mentioned I'm using a K-1 II with pixel shift so my results are going to be even better, and this is to say nothing of stitch techniques.

    Bigger is bigger and I appreciate that, but in normal print sizes such as 13x19, 17x22, 24", 44", camera scanning techniques are beyond adequate. I'm a big believer in the idea that sometimes you gotta leave the numbers at the door and just use your eyeballs to evaluate what you think is acceptable. Talking about resolving grain clumping just kind of makes most people roll their eyes back into their heads. I'm getting fabulous results using 35mm full frame cameras and conventional macro lenses. Theories and back of the napkin math isn't going to change that.

  7. #27
    Peter De Smidt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Fond du Lac, WI, USA
    Posts
    6,766

    Re: DSLR scanning vs Dedicated flatbed scanning.

    Yes, I agree that we often grossly overestimate the required resolution for a good print, especially if grain won't be visible.
    You often feel tired, not because you've done too much, but because you've done too little of what sparks a light in you.
    ― Alexander Den Heijer, Nothing you don't already know

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    4,211

    Re: DSLR scanning vs Dedicated flatbed scanning.

    Quote Originally Posted by sperdynamite View Post
    I'll also add that there is an IMO misconception that more resolution is always better.
    What is critical is the digital processing in Ps, what user does with software.



    Quote Originally Posted by sperdynamite View Post
    I've seen the discussions about resolving the actual grain clumps, etc... I am of the opinion that your desired output is really all that matters.
    A refined technique in scanning/processing can be critical to get a sound grain depiction. Sometimes grain is irrelevant (specially in LF), but sometimes grain is very important for the aesthetics and it requires a proficient management.




    Quote Originally Posted by sperdynamite View Post
    Example: When it comes to 4x5 I can get a 16x20 print at 300ppi with a single capture using a D810.
    In that case your print is suboptimal, a good 4x5" negative has 400MPix effective, the print has 28,800,000 continuous tone pixels (16x20x300x300), but the 810 may take some 25 MPix effective with contrast extintion at pixel level, so you may need 2 pixels in the print to have a tonal change when it could be done with a single one. This can be more or less relevant (or simply not relevant) depending on the scene and on what you want, but you effectively print at around 150 effective resolution instead 300, 150 is not bad, but it's not 300 effective.


    For sure, if only taking some 20Mpix from the 4x5 negative you may not need a view camera, you may shot MF roll film (with a fraction of the cost/weight) and you will notice absolutely no image quality change, or you may simply shot the scene with the D810 directly.




    Quote Originally Posted by sperdynamite View Post
    I'm getting fabulous results using 35mm full frame cameras and conventional macro lenses. Theories and back of the napkin math isn't going to change that.
    For sure... no doubt. A human eye can only see around 60MPix. LF greatness is beyond Image Quality, crazy high IQ comes as a bonus, it's nice having some 800 effective Mpix in a 8x10 shot, a crazy overkill, but a true artist using a view camera knows why he wants the bellows !!!

  9. #29

    Re: DSLR scanning vs Dedicated flatbed scanning.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pere Casals View Post
    What is critical is the digital processing in Ps, what user does with software.

    A refined technique in scanning/processing can be critical to get a sound grain depiction. Sometimes grain is irrelevant (specially in LF), but sometimes grain is very important for the aesthetics and it requires a proficient management.

    In that case your print is suboptimal, a good 4x5" negative has 400MPix effective, the print has 28,800,000 continuous tone pixels (16x20x300x300), but the 810 may take some 25 MPix effective with contrast extintion at pixel level, so you may need 2 pixels in the print to have a tonal change when it could be done with a single one. This can be more or less relevant (or simply not relevant) depending on the scene and on what you want, but you effectively print at around 150 effective resolution instead 300, 150 is not bad, but it's not 300 effective.

    For sure, if only taking some 20Mpix from the 4x5 negative you may not need a view camera, you may shot MF roll film (with a fraction of the cost/weight) and you will notice absolutely no image quality change, or you may simply shot the scene with the D810 directly.

    For sure... no doubt. A human eye can only see around 60MPix. LF greatness is beyond Image Quality, crazy high IQ comes as a bonus, it's nice having some 800 effective Mpix in a 8x10 shot, a crazy overkill, but a true artist using a view camera knows why he wants the bellows !!!
    I think my suboptimal print looks great great. I should know as I have the original chrome for comparison. I think telling someone that their print is "sub-optimal" sight unseen based on some math that 'should' apply (but really only applies to Plato's Scanner) is the very worst example of internet photography forum punditry.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	_IMG0514.jpg 
Views:	28 
Size:	47.1 KB 
ID:	192494Click image for larger version. 

Name:	_IMG0523.jpg 
Views:	33 
Size:	36.9 KB 
ID:	192495

  10. #30
    Peter De Smidt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Fond du Lac, WI, USA
    Posts
    6,766

    Re: DSLR scanning vs Dedicated flatbed scanning.

    Amen! Some forum members seem stuck in Plato's cave. Alas, I expect Plato's scanner would only image ideas and not material objects.
    You often feel tired, not because you've done too much, but because you've done too little of what sparks a light in you.
    ― Alexander Den Heijer, Nothing you don't already know

Similar Threads

  1. Flatbed Scanning Negatives?
    By jharr in forum Digital Hardware
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 14-Apr-2013, 04:17
  2. More scanning: Best practices for DSLR scanning
    By sully75 in forum Digital Hardware
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 3-Jan-2012, 15:37
  3. Flatbed scanners for MF neg scanning?
    By Arne Norris in forum Digital Hardware
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 10-Mar-2010, 18:06
  4. Scanning 4x5 with a flatbed...
    By Stephanie Brim in forum Digital Hardware
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 26-May-2008, 07:27
  5. flatbed scanning
    By terry_5379 in forum Digital Processing
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 17-Oct-2007, 01:06

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
  •