Scan 4x5 Neg or Contact Print w/small twist

[Pawlowski6132]

Ok, I know there's a thread here similar to this already but, all things being NOT equal...

So, if I was to deliver to you a TIFF file for a non-critical project would you rather I gave you:

1) Scan 4x5 B/W negative at 4800 optical resolution
2) Make a contact print of 4x5 B/W negative and scan at 6400 optical resolution

[Peter De Smidt]

1). With 2) 600 dpi would cover it. That's what Brooks Jensen of Lenswork used for his special editions, which were scans of prints.

[Jim Noel]

I would rather have the contact print and no scan of any kind!

[Paul Kierstead]

I believe photographic paper resolution is quite poor, so I suspect 6400 dpi would gain you absolutely nothing over 600 dpi, as Mr. De Smidt suggests.

Presuming the scan of the negative is a finished "print" (electronically at least), I'd take that.

[Lenny Eiger]

Ok, I know there's a thread here similar to this already but, all things being NOT equal...

So, if I was to deliver to you a TIFF file for a non-critical project would you rather I gave you:

1) Scan 4x5 B/W negative at 4800 optical resolution
2) Make a contact print of 4x5 B/W negative and scan at 6400 optical resolution

Scan the neg.
Unless you are using a high-end drum scanner, your numbers, specifically the term "optical" before the word "resolution" are incorrect. Consumer level scanners scan in the optical realm of 1900-2400, depending on who you talk to.

It is always better to scan the negs, as long as they bend...

Lenny

[sanking]

I believe photographic paper resolution is quite poor, so I suspect 6400 dpi would gain you absolutely nothing over 600 dpi, as Mr. De Smidt suggests.

Presuming the scan of the negative is a finished "print" (electronically at least), I'd take that.

Paul,

My understanding is different. From what I have read silver gelatin photographic papers are capable of resolution of over 40 lp/mm, much greater than inkjet prints.

Course, in order to get that kind of resolution the print would have to be a contact print from an in-camera negative.

Sandy King

[Paul Kierstead]

Paul,

My understanding is different. From what I have read silver gelatin photographic papers are capable of resolution of over 40 lp/mm, much greater than inkjet prints.

40 lp/mm isn't all that high -- as a source for scanning and enlargement -- anyway (though greater then I would assume, I'll admit); certainly not warranting 6400 dpi. Note sure what a inkjet has to do with it Mind you, if it was 40 lp/mm for a 16x20, that would still give a lot of pixels even at much less then 6400 dpi, but would seem unlikely to be a contact print (albiet not impossible).

As a total side note, listened to your interview on analog photo podcast today, quite enjoyed it, makes me hanker to make a carbon print.

[Cesar Barreto]

If you don't expect high demands on quality or artistry about the TIFF files, I would also consider using a DSLR, as this procedure can be very fast, economical and quite versatile if RAW capture is considered.

Cesar B.