Digital BW, The Print

Paul Roark writes:

> I'd be wary of flatbed dpi claims.  They may have that many receptors, but
> the actual sharpness and information is not, in my experience, close to
what
> a true film scanner will produce.  After all, a lens that can cover 8.5
> inches is not going to be able to compete with a lens that is designed to
> just cover 2.25 inches, all else being equal.  My Epson 1600 Expression
Pro,
> for example, captures a reasonably good 800 dpi, but that's about it.

Agreed. I'd be very wary of flatbed dpi claims. When I first started down
the digital path I was recommended the Epson Expression 1600 by a very
respected photographer (won't name names.) I found out fairly quickly that
its claimed max optical dpi of 1600 was exactly that: a claim (aka marketing
hype!) As Paul said, it would do a reasonable 800, but that was it. Since I
was scanning mostly 8x10 B&W negs the max 800 was workable. At some point, a
reasonable deal came my way to upgrade to the Expression 1680 and, since I
could use the same TPA, I went for it hoping that it would handle a FULL
optical 1600. I have been very happy with 1600 scans from this scanner for
LF film. I wouldn't recommend it for MF (maybe 6x7...maybe) and certainly
not 35mm.

Alan Huntley