Digital BW, The Print

> From: Art
>
> I am getting ready to purchase a Minolta Konica scanner over
> purchasing a new digital camera because everything I have read about
> scanning a 35mm black and white negative has indicated that scanning
> has the megapixal equivalent of around 20mgpixals or above campared to
> the cameras that are out there now.
>
> does anyone have any comments?

That's probably true, if your art depends upon maximum sharpness and loads
of detail. In my opinion, though, to reach that high resolution and get
useful data out of it (instead of merely a more accurate representation of
the blur and grain), you'll need to shoot low ISO, stick to primes, focus
carefully, and use a tripod with mirror lockup for everything.

On the other hand, there is another digital approach, which works on
landscapes and other things that sit still, and that's to shoot lots of
smaller pictures and stitch them together. That way, you retain the
advantages of the quick turnaround, yet can still get gargantuan images with
loads of detail. Modern stitching software, like PTGui, has gotten really
good, and with some practice you can get really quick at it. Shooting a 4x4
array can realistically give you at least the equivalent of a 2x2 sized
sensor, maybe even 3x3, after you factor out the overlap, and the
interpolation filtering. So even a cheap eight megapixel camera like a Rebel
XT should give you more than enough resolution.

--

Ciao,               Paul D. DeRocco
Paul                mailto:pderocco@...