|[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]|
Gerald Olson writes: >Russell: the 2450 DPI scanner certainly IS adequate for 11x14 prints, IF you >have used a fine grained, sharp film to begin with. (Technical Pan, Pan F, >Agfapan 25, Kodak Royal Gold 100, Velvia, Kodachrome, etc). I have Many 13x19 >prints made from a 2700 DPI Scanner that are noticeably sharper than I can get >them from an enlarger in the darkroom. >If you are using the faster films and don't use a tripod, then you >are probably right. Actually, it's the other way around. Faster films and shooting without a tripod will generally result in less detail on the film, so it doesn't help to scan at higher resolutions. I generally don't bother to print those shots at 11X14, though I have a couple shot on 400 speed Fuji print film that look quite good (no matter how you print it, 400 speed slide film looks very grainy and unsharp at 11X14 in comparison -- at that speed, print film is *way* better). I have compared both Velvia and Reala 100 (shot on tripod) scanned at 2450 vs. 4000 DPI and printed at 11X14 or 11X16 on the EX, and the higher resolution scans produce visibly sharper prints. As others have noted, if you figure 240 dpi as the effective resolution for the printer, you need more than a 2450 dpi scan for an 11X14. I find that if I have at least 240 dpi at the final print size, I can indeed match or exceed the apparent sharpness of a darkroom print, but if it's significantly less than that (e.g. a 2450 dpi scan blown up to 11X4), the darkroom print generally looks sharper. YMMV (and obviously does). Viewed by itself, an 11X14 from a 2450 scan looks pretty good, but side by side with a print from a 4000 dpi scan of the same image, the difference in visible detail is dramatic. Russell - Turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use accurate subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for list instructions.
[Photo] [Yosemite News] [Yosemite Photos] [Scanner] [Gimp] [Gimp Users]