Optimum Scanning Resolution Question

C

CV33

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1
Edit My Images
No
Hello,
I am new to this forum and am looking for tips on how best to scan some interesting old negatives which I believe are medium format and range from 6x6cm to 6x9cm. They were created in the 1950's by an RAF serviceman and are well preserved in small albums containing 100 images.

I want to scan the negatives at very high resolution so that their digital counterparts contain the same amount of image detail when zoomed into very closely. I don't mind if they are huge files but I obviously don't want to create gigantic files that go beyond the limit where any useful detail can be observed if you know what I mean.

I have bought an Epson V500 for the job and have experimented with different file sizes but am still unsure of what I am doing! I want to get it right first time so I have to only scan them once and can store them away for good. Any ideas would be much appreciated.
 
Literally everyone you ask will have a different answer to this. Personally I go for 2400DPI on a V500, as it's a decent compromise between the detail the scanner actually makes out and gigantic file sizes.
 
I am with Rob on this one 2400DPI on my V500,but, I do B&W at 1200DPI.
 
Another vote for 2400dpi here. I arrived at the same after reading this on Photobox;

A. scanning from film:

If you scan a 35mm film, we recommend scanning the film at a 2700 dpi (do not use this dpi for old photographs scan - see section below)

The ratio of (scanning resolution/printing resolution) is the enlargement factor. For example, scanning film at 2700 dpi and printing scaled to 300 dpi gives 2700/300 = 9 times enlargement of the original film size. 9X is about 8x12 inches (near A4 size) from full frame 35 mm. This enlargement requirement is why film needs high resolution.

Using that I worked on the basis that 2400dpi for Medium Format was about enough for my needs.

Mark
 
^^^ I agree, 2400 is a good compromise and produces perfectly good scans with lots of detail.

Andy
 
yikes....think I know why a lot of my negative scans are too grainy....I've been using 800 DPI
 
I use 4800dpi on my 4490 which is a V500 in different clothes and its real good and the 35mm file sizes are good, i suspect that will be fine o medium format or 2400dpi the answer is to do some comparisons.
 
I've been using 3200 dpi and then 2x reduction on most of my medium format, I think. But I haven't done many. It's still making 4-5 MB JPEG files. I'd be prepared to rescan any I wanted to print larger, although I don't like double handling.

The scans Paul did for me came back as 160MB TIFFs, or 1024pixel Jpegs. So those 19 frames ate 2% of my available disk space! Scary...
 
Yep I'll go along with 2400 dpi for MF, but if you come across a shot you want printed to say 16X20 I'd scan at a higher DPI..it wont make any difference to the detail in the shot but the software will ensure you get less pixel breakup and so better for enlargements as it would look cleaner...maybe belt and braces for 6X6 (maybe someone would agree with my suggestion if they have experience of MF printing), but I know it's worth worth doing for 35mm.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top