If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Scanning Negatives
Lobby Dosser wrote:
Mike Mueller wrote: I'm still a fan of doing 90% of the work when the shot is taken. I'm not interested in using photoshop to fix a poorly framed or exposed shot. The fun of the hobby is being able to compose the shot before, not after. I shoot both film and digital and find that my film shots are generally better than the digital because I still *think* when I'm shooting film. G Thats a good way of putting it.. I find that when I use my daughter Digital SLR, I just shoot away. If I don't like a shot, I just hit delete. it costs nothing to shoot a few hundred frames in digital. Film requires "thought". Thanks again for all the assistance Mike Mueller |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Scanning Negatives
"Mike Mueller" wrote: Thats a good way of putting it.. I find that when I use my daughter Digital SLR, I just shoot away. If I don't like a shot, I just hit delete. it costs nothing to shoot a few hundred frames in digital. Film requires "thought". Digital requires thought also, if one wants images worth showing people. Whether or not one has a personality flaw that prevents one thinking when one has a digital camera in one's hand is the photographer's problem... David J. Littleboy Tokyo, Japan |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Scanning Negatives
"David J. Littleboy" wrote:
"Mike Mueller" wrote: Thats a good way of putting it.. I find that when I use my daughter Digital SLR, I just shoot away. If I don't like a shot, I just hit delete. it costs nothing to shoot a few hundred frames in digital. Film requires "thought". Digital requires thought also, if one wants images worth showing people. Whether or not one has a personality flaw that prevents one thinking when one has a digital camera in one's hand is the photographer's problem... Oh dear, must we bracket the light hearted remarks with [humor on] and [humor off]? |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Scanning Negatives
David J. Littleboy wrote:
"Mike Mueller" wrote: Thats a good way of putting it.. I find that when I use my daughter Digital SLR, I just shoot away. If I don't like a shot, I just hit delete. it costs nothing to shoot a few hundred frames in digital. Film requires "thought". Digital requires thought also, if one wants images worth showing people. Whether or not one has a personality flaw that prevents one thinking when one has a digital camera in one's hand is the photographer's problem... David J. Littleboy Tokyo, Japan I did notrealize, making fun of myself was going to invoke such a response from anyone. It was not directed at this newsgroup or it's members. Mike Mueller |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Scanning Negatives
Mike Mueller wrote:
David J. Littleboy wrote: "Mike Mueller" wrote: Thats a good way of putting it.. I find that when I use my daughter Digital SLR, I just shoot away. If I don't like a shot, I just hit delete. it costs nothing to shoot a few hundred frames in digital. Film requires "thought". Digital requires thought also, if one wants images worth showing people. Whether or not one has a personality flaw that prevents one thinking when one has a digital camera in one's hand is the photographer's problem... David J. Littleboy Tokyo, Japan I did notrealize, making fun of myself was going to invoke such a response from anyone. It was not directed at this newsgroup or it's members. Mike Mueller Obviously. ) |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Scanning Negatives
Robert Feinman writes:
The rule of thumb for making prints is the degree of desired magnification is (scan resolution)/300 dpi. So to do a 4x enlargement you would scan at 1200 dpi. A rule I go by is scan at the highest resolution that still gives more details so you don't have to rescan when you need to make a larger print. HD space is cheap is scanning is so bothersome I don't want to scan the same frame several times. This is an easy rule to follow because I just scan everything at 3200 DPI without having to think about the size of my enlargements. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Scanning Negatives
Toni Nikkanen wrote:
Robert Feinman writes: The rule of thumb for making prints is the degree of desired magnification is (scan resolution)/300 dpi. So to do a 4x enlargement you would scan at 1200 dpi. A rule I go by is scan at the highest resolution that still gives more details so you don't have to rescan when you need to make a larger print. HD space is cheap is scanning is so bothersome I don't want to scan the same frame several times. This is an easy rule to follow because I just scan everything at 3200 DPI without having to think about the size of my enlargements. Which scanning software do you use. Epson does not recommend scanning above 1200dpi with the dust removal running. As a mater of fact, the program will not let you scan above that with dust removal. They also do not recommned anything above 9600dpi. Their software can not handle higher resolution scans. Thank you Mike Mueller |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Scanning Negatives
Mike Mueller writes:
Which scanning software do you use. Epson does not recommend scanning above 1200dpi with the dust removal running. As a mater of fact, the program will not let you scan above that with dust removal. They also do not recommned anything above 9600dpi. Their software can not handle higher resolution scans. Thank you Mike Mueller I haven't obviously followed the thread from the beginning and was just commenting generally on this "rules of thumbs for selecting a scanning DPI depending on the enlargement size" thing because I don't subscribe to that philosophy. I use an Epson V700 and there's nothing against scanning at 3200DPI, either with Epson Scan or Silverfast. ICE works. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Scanning Negatives
Robert Feinman wrote:
In article .net, says... Hello All. Let me preface this by saying I know I can probably find what i need with a google search and a few hours, but I'm hoping to speed it up a little I'm getting back into photography and I am playing around with a scanner and PS instead of traditional wet printing. What resolution do most of you use when scanning neg's into photoshop. I've got 4 gig of ram on a windows XP machine and 300 gig plus of hard drive space and PS CS3 I'm using a Mamiya 645 Pro TL Thank you in advance Mike Mueller The rule of thumb for making prints is the degree of desired magnification is (scan resolution)/300 dpi. So to do a 4x enlargement you would scan at 1200 dpi. I agre with Toni: Scan at max for detail and save that as the basic scan. You can always down sample cleanly for a required print size. You can never upsample and get detail. Re-scannning sucks. -- -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Scanning old negatives | Stuart | Digital Photography | 17 | April 20th 07 05:53 AM |
Help scanning negatives, please! | iamcanadian | 35mm Photo Equipment | 12 | December 3rd 06 02:32 AM |
Scanning 110 negatives | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 3 | July 30th 06 12:02 PM |
Scanning 126 and 110 negatives | Terry Tomato | Film & Labs | 7 | March 14th 05 11:06 AM |
Lab for Scanning Negatives..... | ron | 35mm Photo Equipment | 3 | October 14th 04 05:30 PM |