Print Resolution of Scanned Image

Tell me if I'm right: If I have a film scanner that scans a 35 mm image
with 3600 dpi, would that limit me to a maximum print size of 12" (length,
using 300 dpi printing as a "photo-real" minimum and maximum print
resolution)?

Thanks ahead...

Not really.
The limit is based on what you consider acceptable print quality.
Depending on the subject matter of the print 200 dpi may yield good quality
prints at even larger than 12'' sizes.

"Ned Buntline" wrote in
news:hatZd.4646$I16.1414@trndny03:

Tell me if I'm right: If I have a film scanner that scans a 35 mm
image with 3600 dpi, would that limit me to a maximum print size of
12" (length, using 300 dpi printing as a "photo-real" minimum and
maximum print resolution)?

You're right.

Assuming you need 300 ppi. If we're talking about an inkjet printer instead
of 150 or so line offset lithography, you'll likely be able to use a lower
resolution (240 or so) and your prints will be fine.

On 3/14/05 10:05 PM, in article hatZd.4646$I16.1414@trndny03, "Ned Buntline"
wrote:

Tell me if I'm right: If I have a film scanner that scans a 35 mm image
with 3600 dpi, would that limit me to a maximum print size of 12" (length,
using 300 dpi printing as a "photo-real" minimum and maximum print
resolution)?

Thanks ahead...


Since a 35 mm image is about 1.42" in length you would get more than 3600
"dots" in your scan - your would get about 5112. Therefore, at 300 dpi, a
print would be about 17" wide

On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 04:05:33 GMT, "Ned Buntline"
wrote:

Tell me if I'm right: If I have a film scanner that scans a 35 mm image
with 3600 dpi, would that limit me to a maximum print size of 12" (length,
using 300 dpi printing as a "photo-real" minimum and maximum print
resolution)?

Thanks ahead...



35 mm film is approximately 1" x 1.5" so you've got
5400 pixels in the long dimension and 3600 in the
short dimension.

At 300 dpi, you get roughly a 12" x 18" print.

Don't take the 300 dpi figure as gospel, but as a
suggested starting point. Large prints are meant
to be viewed from farther away, so a lower dpi value
(say, 200-240) may be fine.

The nature of the image also plays a role, as does
the paper surface. As a rule, glossy "photo" papers
will benefit from higher resolution, while images on
coarse-textured "fine art" papers can use much lower
resolutions.



rafe b.
http://www.terrapinphoto.com

Ned Buntline wrote:
Tell me if I'm right: If I have a film scanner that scans a 35 mm image
with 3600 dpi, would that limit me to a maximum print size of 12" (length,
using 300 dpi printing as a "photo-real" minimum and maximum print
resolution)?

Thanks ahead...


IF you have a true optical 3600dpi scanner, then you have a very
expensive piece of hardware, and likely wouldn't be asking this
question. For a good scan of a 35mm slide, you need about 2700dpi, true
optical resolution. Setting a 1200dpi scanner to produce a 3600dpi
image is not productive of a better image than scanning at 1200dpi. For
all the technical information you can use, and some sensible advice, go
he
www.scantips.com


--
Ron Hunter

On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 04:20:25 -0600, Ron Hunter
wrote:

Ned Buntline wrote:
Tell me if I'm right: If I have a film scanner that scans a 35 mm image
with 3600 dpi, would that limit me to a maximum print size of 12" (length,
using 300 dpi printing as a "photo-real" minimum and maximum print
resolution)?

Thanks ahead...


IF you have a true optical 3600dpi scanner, then you have a very
expensive piece of hardware, and likely wouldn't be asking this
question. For a good scan of a 35mm slide, you need about 2700dpi, true
optical resolution. Setting a 1200dpi scanner to produce a 3600dpi
image is not productive of a better image than scanning at 1200dpi. For
all the technical information you can use, and some sensible advice, go
he
www.scantips.com



Ron, I believe there are a several reasonably
priced film scanners these days with 3600 dpi native
resolution. The Epson flatbeds (4870, 4990) can
actually claim 4800 dpi optical resolution.
Check out Pacific Image.

Current filmscanners from Nikon, Minolta, Canon
all deliver 4000 dpi optical or better.
(Minolta delivers 5400 dpi for 35 mm.)

2700 dpi was a good resolution for CCD filmscanners
designed about four or five years ago.


rafe b.
http://www.terrapinphoto.com

"Ned Buntline" wrote in message
news:hatZd.4646$I16.1414@trndny03...
Tell me if I'm right: If I have a film scanner that scans a 35 mm image
with 3600 dpi, would that limit me to a maximum print size of 12" (length,
using 300 dpi printing as a "photo-real" minimum and maximum print
resolution)?

Thanks ahead.
It might if you consider 300 dpi to be a hard requirement. It isn't. In
fact, I can see little difference between 240 dpi and 300. In fact, I only
notice a slight degredation at 180 dpi.
Jim..

Ron Hunter wrote:

"IF you have a true optical 3600dpi scanner, then you have a very expensive
piece of hardware, and likely wouldn't be asking this question."

Actually, I have the Pacific Image PrimeFilm 3600Pro 35mm film scanner,
which has a true optical resolution of 3600x3600 dpi.

I ask this question because I am moving over to digital rendering of my fine
art images, which I have worked in the "wetworld" for quite some time. My
4x5 images I get scanned with a drum scanner at a local photo house. I
bought the 3600Pro to do my 35mm negs. I'm just starting to understand
digital imaging, so I want to understand what my maximum image size can be
when printed from an Epson 2200. As these images are intended to be
displayed in a gallery (and sold), I want to make sure I don't suffer image
degradation by going to a lower print resolution than the file material will
provide.

Jim wrote:

"Ned Buntline" wrote in message
news:hatZd.4646$I16.1414@trndny03...

Tell me if I'm right: If I have a film scanner that scans a 35 mm image
with 3600 dpi, would that limit me to a maximum print size of 12" (length,
using 300 dpi printing as a "photo-real" minimum and maximum print
resolution)?

Thanks ahead.

It might if you consider 300 dpi to be a hard requirement. It isn't. In
fact, I can see little difference between 240 dpi and 300. In fact, I only
notice a slight degredation at 180 dpi.
Jim..




I have seen many people recommend (and I endorse this recommendation)
that prints can be anywhere between 200 and 300 ppi.

It depends somewhat on the scene. A foggy low key or noir image may
look fine at 200 ppi. A high contrast backlit filigree scene, like
wrought iron railings or something, may require the 300.

The only hard and fast rule should be that there are no hard and fast rules.