Digital BW, The Print

steveabrink wrote:
> I'm shooting a Mamiya 7ii w/ 6x7cm film and scan w/ a Microtek 120 MF 
> scanner w/ Silverfast. The problem is when I scan at 4000 ppi optical 
> at 16 bit my resulting files are 500+ MB, and that is w/o adjustment 
> layers in the post processing stage which can be 1 gb+!  The quality 
> BTW is usually better than my 5D Canon... I've tested downsampling to 
> 3200 and even 2400 ppi and I really can't see a difference which brings 
> it down nearly half the file size.  I'm not even sure I can see a 
> differnce when downsampling from 16 bit to 8 bit if I don't do much 
> post processing. I'm just wondering what other folks do to keep there 
> files sizes reasonable and still attain the highest quality...? 

Did you test both file sizes 4000 and 2400 PPI on really big
prints say 4 feet wide and notice no difference ?
If they are equal, do you get enough information from your
scanner at 4000 PPI ?
If I recall it correctly the scanner shares the same Kodak
trilinear sensor that the Nikon 8000 has and the Nikon is
tested on resolution and delivers between 3600 and 3800 PPI
true resolution.
Another test, upsample the 2400 PPI one to 4000 again and
check detail of the original 4000 PPI scan to detail of the
converted 4000 PPI scan.
The scanner optics filthy meanwhile ?

In other words, there should be 4000 PPI  information
available in Mamiya 7 II film frames and the files will be
huge.

If the quality is usually better than the 5D Canon you could 
consider upgrading to the 5D Mark II which should bridge 
that last IQ difference you see and could make the Mamiya + 
Microtek + old 5D obsolete and deliver smaller files at the 
same time. The Mamiya + lenses + Microtek + old  5D must 
bring you close to the purchasing price of the new 5D. Maybe 
not the answer you were expecting ..........


-- 
Met vriendelijke groeten,  Ernst


|  Dinkla Grafische Techniek  |
|     www.pigment-print.com    |
|             ( unvollendet )            |