Digital BW, The Print

----- Original Message -----
From: "Shire,Stanley" <sshire@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, September 20, 2002 6:16 AM
Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Re: 4x5 Neg Scan Resolution


> Didn't we go through this in the last "What size to scan" thread? If I
> remember correctly, (please correct me if I'm wrong) 350 is about the
> max the Epson's use. So, 44x33 @ 350spi is about 500mb (ok, 1gb in 16
> bit). I, of course, scan my medium and large format in 16 bit. (Jeff
> Schewe says that anyone who isn't working in 16 bit is a "recreational"
> Photoshop user.) So, by the time I've mucked the pixels around in 16
> bit/channel, flattened and converted to an 8 bit tiff for printing
> (Can't wait for my IP5, which won't require tiff files to print) my file
> is back to 500 mb. Will More than 350 ppi/spi give me a visually better
> print (disregarding viewing distance)??

Stan,

My preference is to scan to get as much info off the neg as possible and
save that. I can then throw away data latter if necessary. My next
consideration is to downsample to a file size that runs reasonably fast on
my machine and stays above 360 ppi. Better too much data than not enough.

I only do major adjustments in 16 bit and then drop to 8-bit in order to use
masked layers. I find that adjustment layers and using the layer opacity
control this gives me the control I want to do very fine tweaking of an
image. It is not unusual for me to wind up with 10 to 20 layers for making
different adjustments to small areas of the image. I have occasionally hit
an image where I needed to go back and apply all the 8-bit work to a 16-bit
version of the file but this has been extremely rare. As a general rule I
don't see any advantage to staying in 16-bit all the way through.

Personally I don't see any difference in sending more than 360ppi to the
printer. This will be especially true for IP5 which renders at a max of 360.

Martin Wesley
>
> Stan Shire
> Associate Professor/Department Chair
> Photographic Imaging
> Community College of Philadelphia
> Adobe Photoshop 6 A.C.E.
>
> 215 751-8320
> sshire@...
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Anthony Atkielski [mailto:atkielski@...]
> Sent: Friday, September 20, 2002 8:53 AM
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: 4x5 Neg Scan Resolution
>
> Stanley writes:
>
> > Geez! How many of us are printing 44"x33" prints
> > (that is approximately = to a 500meg file?)
>
> A 6x6 image scanned at 4000 dpi and 16-bit depth will yield about 480
> megabytes.  A 6x9 image will reach 850 MB or so.  Presumably if you are
> shooting medium format in the first place, it's because you intend to
> make
> very large prints that will be examined at close range--otherwise you
> could
> simply shoot 35mm or even digital.  This is all the more true for
> large-format images.  Incidentally, an 8x10 transparency scanned at 5000
> dpi
> (about the highest one ever need go with slide films) yields a 12,000 MB
> file.  Such a file could produce a backlit mural 60 feet on a side,
> large
> enough to adorn the wall of a railroad station or airport terminal.
>
> I've seen 15x7-foot backlit enlargements from digital camera files, and
> they
> look horrible, as the lack of resolution is extremely easy to see unless
> you
> are practically in another room.  No such problem with large film
> formats.
>
> One other reason for using very high-resolution images is that they give
> you
> a great deal of headroom for manipulation in Photoshop before they start
> to
> degrade visibly.
>