Digital BW, The Print

I looked through the archives of the Epson scanner forums but couldn't seem to find a 
direct answer to my question so here goes...

I use an Epson 3200 to scan B&W negs for printing and have generally scanned my 4X5 
negatives at their original size and at 1600 dpi - so when the day comes, I can print 
11x14's at 600 (or so) dpi. I'm new to this brave new world so I'm wondering if other large 
format photographers in the group have a different take on this. I want to scan at a high 
enough resolution to preserve detail, but not too high a resolution to aviod HUGE 
Photoshop files.

Thanks for any help you can offer

Phil C.

I too scan my 4x5s at 1600 dpi using an Epson 3200.  If you assume you send
to the printer driver at 360 dpi, a 1600 dpi scan will let you print up to
about 16x20 depending on whether you do any cropping or not.  There is
really no need to send to the printer at 600 dpi.  Using the Epson drivers,
300 or more is good enough and if you are using Qimage, I am confident you
could print much larger (with lower effective dpi) and get good results.

I did some initial scans at 3200 dpi and didn't have problems with the files
in Photoshop, but I did find that Qimage had problems with the file sizes
associated with a 3200 dpi scan.  No problems with Qimage and the 1600 dpi
scan.  My output right now is limited to 13x19 because my printer is an
Epson 2200, but I am confident with my 1600 dpi scans, I can pretty much
print any size I want.

Also by the way, I scan in 16 bit grayscale to keep file sizes reasonable.

Paul

If you scan at too high a PPI, you are scanning the grain. You need to 
do some backward tests to see where that ends.
Mark

On Mar 11, 2005, at 9:24 PM, pdcorlis wrote:

>
>  I looked through the archives of the Epson scanner forums but 
> couldn't seem to find a
>  direct answer to my question so here goes...
>
>  I use an Epson 3200 to scan B&W negs for printing and have generally 
> scanned my 4X5
>  negatives at their original size and at 1600 dpi - so when the day 
> comes, I can print
>  11x14's at 600 (or so) dpi. I'm new to this brave new world so I'm 
> wondering if other large
>  format photographers in the group have a different take on this. I 
> want to scan at a high
>  enough resolution to preserve detail, but not too high a resolution 
> to aviod HUGE
>  Photoshop files.
>
>  Thanks for any help you can offer
>
>  Phil C.
>
>
>
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other 
> resources as they are often being updated.
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
>  If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish 
> to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting 
> this same page.
>
>  Please follow these basic guidelines:
>  - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to 
> keep them short.
>  - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or 
> flames. Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from 
> the membership without notice.
>  - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital 
> B&W printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be 
> removed from the membership.
>  - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and 
> guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group 
> Owner and Moderators. See �Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines� in the 
> Files section:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/
>
>  BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE 
> PRINT YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE �OWNER� 
> AND �MODERATORS� OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE 
> LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, 
> CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, 
> DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE 
> LOSSES (EVEN IF THE� �OWNER� AND �MODERATORS� OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT 
> YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), 
> RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, 
> THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF 
> YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD 
> PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER 
> MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>
> ADVERTISEMENT
> <22305_0205_016_b_300250_a.gif>
> <l.gif>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> 	� 	To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/
> �
> 	� 	 To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> �
> 	� 	 Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of 
> Service.
>
>  

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

pdcorlis wrote:

>I looked through the archives of the Epson scanner forums but couldn't seem to find a 
>direct answer to my question so here goes...
>
>I use an Epson 3200 to scan B&W negs for printing and have generally scanned my 4X5 
>negatives at their original size and at 1600 dpi - so when the day comes, I can print 
>11x14's at 600 (or so) dpi. I'm new to this brave new world so I'm wondering if other large 
>format photographers in the group have a different take on this. I want to scan at a high 
>enough resolution to preserve detail, but not too high a resolution to aviod HUGE 
>Photoshop files.
>
>Thanks for any help you can offer
>
>Phil C.
>  
>
With many scanners you must be aware that selecting a lower resolution 
that is related to the highest scan resolution with a factor 2/3/4 etc 
the chance exists that the software let the hardware skip steps in 
between. The 3200 probably has a true optical resolution of 1800 PPI 
max. but that's only obtained at its highest resolution setting and not 
when the hardware skips readings in between. I do not know whether that 
also happens at the 1600 PPI setting in this case but there are two ways 
to avoid it: the obvious one is scanning at the highest sampling 
resolution and downsampling later on in Photoshop, the other one is 
scanning at say 1605 PPI. With the last the scanner will use the highest 
hardware sampling resolution it has and the driver software will do the 
downsampling.

With my 3200 I use a wet mount method that I developed and refined over 
the years, much of that can be found in the archives of the 3200 and 
4870 list on Yahoo. To sum it up for the 3200:

Find the focus for your 3200. See Norman Koren's pages.

Cover the entire area of the glassbed with a black mask as thick as the 
focus you found and keep a less than 4x5 inch window in the middle of 
the lamphouse area. Masking is important, the internal reflections play 
a role in quality.

Wet mount the film with an extra sheet of polyester to an extra sheet of 
2 mm floatglass. Emulsion side to the glass.

Lay the film-glass sandwich with the film at the underside on top of the 
mask, the film is below the glass then and doesn't get the heat of the lamp.

Get an extra sheet of glass to prepare the next film for the next scan.

Ernst

Ernst,

Thanks for the tip on scanning at 1605 ppi.  This made a dramatic difference in the quality 
of my 4x5 negative scans on the 3200, compared to just scanning at 1600 ppi.  Much 
better detail and sharpeness at 1605 ppi (using Vuescan).

Carl
--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Ernst Dinkla <E.Dinkla@c...> 
wrote:

> With many scanners you must be aware that selecting a lower resolution 
> that is related to the highest scan resolution with a factor 2/3/4 etc 
> the chance exists that the software let the hardware skip steps in 
> between. The 3200 probably has a true optical resolution of 1800 PPI 
> max. but that's only obtained at its highest resolution setting and not 
> when the hardware skips readings in between. I do not know whether that 
> also happens at the 1600 PPI setting in this case but there are two ways 
> to avoid it: the obvious one is scanning at the highest sampling 
> resolution and downsampling later on in Photoshop, the other one is 
> scanning at say 1605 PPI. With the last the scanner will use the highest 
> hardware sampling resolution it has and the driver software will do the 
> downsampling.
> 
> With my 3200 I use a wet mount method that I developed and refined over 
> the years, much of that can be found in the archives of the 3200 and 
> 4870 list on Yahoo. To sum it up for the 3200:
> 
> Find the focus for your 3200. See Norman Koren's pages.
> 
> Cover the entire area of the glassbed with a black mask as thick as the 
> focus you found and keep a less than 4x5 inch window in the middle of 
> the lamphouse area. Masking is important, the internal reflections play 
> a role in quality.
> 
> Wet mount the film with an extra sheet of polyester to an extra sheet of 
> 2 mm floatglass. Emulsion side to the glass.
> 
> Lay the film-glass sandwich with the film at the underside on top of the 
> mask, the film is below the glass then and doesn't get the heat of the lamp.
> 
> Get an extra sheet of glass to prepare the next film for the next scan.
> 
> Ernst

Carl Schofield wrote:

>Ernst,
>
>Thanks for the tip on scanning at 1605 ppi.  This made a dramatic difference in the quality 
>of my 4x5 negative scans on the 3200, compared to just scanning at 1600 ppi.  Much 
>better detail and sharpeness at 1605 ppi (using Vuescan).
>
>Carl
>  
>
Carl, there could even be more at 1705, 1805, etc depending on the rest 
of your method.

Ernst

I also take 5x4 (100TMax).  But I scan at high resolution (16bit
2400dpi on my 4870) for different reasons that I've seen in this
thread.  It creates a file of just under 200MB.  Firstly, and perhaps
most importantly, it creates a backup of my analogue negative - which
I store securely off line for the dreaded day that negatives are
damaged or destroyed.  But I then have a large file which I can either
work on to provide a multi-purpose final file, i.e. one that I can
print at any size up to its maximum, or I can downsize to work on at a
specific resolution for a specific purpose.

I have heard that I could achieve the same secure effect by creating
smaller files and then using something like "Genuine Fractals"
software to create larger files if they're ever needed.  But I've not
looked into that, and I have a concern about recreating detail from
something that wasn't there!

Steve Gledhill
http://www.virtuallygrey.co.uk


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "pdcorlis"
<pdcorlis@a...> wrote:
> 
> I looked through the archives of the Epson scanner forums but
couldn't seem to find a 
> direct answer to my question so here goes...
> 
> I use an Epson 3200 to scan B&W negs for printing and have generally
scanned my 4X5 
> negatives at their original size and at 1600 dpi - so when the day
comes, I can print 
> 11x14's at 600 (or so) dpi. I'm new to this brave new world so I'm
wondering if other large 
> format photographers in the group have a different take on this. I
want to scan at a high 
> enough resolution to preserve detail, but not too high a resolution
to aviod HUGE 

> Photoshop files.
> 
> Thanks for any help you can offer
> 
> Phil C.