|[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]|
We've also noted that of two scanners that we have, one of which does about 2700 dpi, and the other of which does 5080 dpi... If we scan the same slide on each *at the same output resolution*, we've found that the scanner with the higher available resolution produces a scan with more usable information, even though both scans are ultimately the same size. On the other hand, the lower res scanner is a whole lot faster, so for less critical work, it gets the nod. david Valburg wrote: > At 09:35 AM 8/12/99 -0700, you wrote: > >Is a 35mm worthy of 4000 dpi? I think even if the film improves greatly, > >the whole 35mm system isn't that good. I would go for the Coolscan and get > >the dirt and dust removal. > > > > Not automatically, but it can be, fairly easily. I've seen scans from > these two scanners, of a Kodachrome 200 slide (which is considerably less > fine-grained than the super-fine and super-sharp leaders) in which the > Polaroid clearly resolved more information, getting the grain structure > just right. In a much finer grained, higher resolution film, that could > have been useful information, IMHO, depending on how you wanted to output > the image. How large you'd have to print it on a 3000 in order to benefit > from the additional information is another matter. - Please do not include an entire message in your response. Delete the excess. http://www.leben.com/lists for list instructions.
[Photo] [Yosemite News] [Yosemite Photos] [Scanner] [Gimp] [Gimp] Users