2400 also works for me most of the times for LF, but if a LF negative is really sharp then I scan it at higher dpi, anyway this is more important in 4x5 than in 5x7, IMHO.
YMMV, of course... it depends on print size, for example.
Of course, it depends on how sharp is your shot and how "microcontrasty" textures are, some shots benefit from a higher dpi and some not. Anyway an image requires a x2 effective pixel count (x1.4 linear resolution) to see a real improvement, Image Quality it's very expensive in image size terms.
At 2400 you get under 2000 effective dpi with the EPSON, but you may reach 2900 in the horizontal axis, if this makes or not a benefit for a particular shot and if that improvement is necessary... it depends...
When I shot ADOX CMS 20 sheets I easily see the difference, TMX resolves more or less depending on microcontrast, datasheet tells very different resolving power depending on contrast.
With bundled Silverfast, Ps and a SSD disk I've no problem.
I don't agree with that, tonality is exactly the same, scan a crop at 2400 and at 6400, make images of the same size and compare, if you noticed a difference it had to be an edition effect or scanning settings. Why tonal tonality has to change with dpi ?
PD: if scanning 16 bits per channel then you do what you want with tonality in the curve edition, of course a problem is is there if scanning or saving the file in 8bits: banding soon happens.
In LF lenses there is a sample to sample variation, a Sironar N may be better or worse than a CM-W. Fujis don't usually include shims for the front cell, many Sironars do, if the original shims are lost then the right shimming has to be found.
NWS or CM-W lenses are not better or worse than Sironar N.
An old Dagor/Protar should resolve less in a good shot, of course, another thing is when this makes a difference or not.
YMMV, but to depict well the film grain structure you need higher efective dpi than the EPSON is able, fortunately grain structure is mostly irrelevant in LF, most of the times. In fact it's really difficult to depict well grain structure in the hybrid processing, nothing like a "through the negative" wet print for a pleasing grain structure (when enlargement vs film nature and processing shows the grain).
Bookmarks