A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

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.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Photo Equipment » 35mm Photo Equipment
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

enlarging photos



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old October 18th 04, 07:40 PM
Developwebsites
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default enlarging photos

I have a lot of photos I'd like to get reprints of, some enlarged
and scanned.
Is it better to scan them and crop and blowup on the computer or crop then
enlarge from negative then scan? Is the quality of the print(size of grain)
the same if I crop and enlarge a subject 3x to 4x6 as it is if I just enlarge a
4x6 3x and then scan and crop?

I have used ISO100,200,400 but dont remember which negs
are which. Some negatives do say 200 or 400 on the strip, some dont.



  #2  
Old October 18th 04, 08:48 PM
Joseph Meehan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Developwebsites wrote:
I have a lot of photos I'd like to get reprints of, some enlarged
and scanned.
Is it better to scan them and crop and blowup on the computer or crop then
enlarge from negative then scan? Is the quality of the print(size of
grain)
the same if I crop and enlarge a subject 3x to 4x6 as it is if I just
enlarge a 4x6 3x and then scan and crop?

I have used ISO100,200,400 but dont remember which negs
are which. Some negatives do say 200 or 400 on the strip, some dont.


Always work from the most original source to get the best results. In
other words, if you have a negative, then print directly from the negative
if possible.

On the other hand, it may be a lot easier to scan than then print
digitally. With a really good scan and good equipment the loss will be
minimal.



--
Joseph E. Meehan

26 + 6 = 1 It's Irish Math



  #3  
Old October 18th 04, 08:48 PM
Joseph Meehan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Developwebsites wrote:
I have a lot of photos I'd like to get reprints of, some enlarged
and scanned.
Is it better to scan them and crop and blowup on the computer or crop then
enlarge from negative then scan? Is the quality of the print(size of
grain)
the same if I crop and enlarge a subject 3x to 4x6 as it is if I just
enlarge a 4x6 3x and then scan and crop?

I have used ISO100,200,400 but dont remember which negs
are which. Some negatives do say 200 or 400 on the strip, some dont.


Always work from the most original source to get the best results. In
other words, if you have a negative, then print directly from the negative
if possible.

On the other hand, it may be a lot easier to scan than then print
digitally. With a really good scan and good equipment the loss will be
minimal.



--
Joseph E. Meehan

26 + 6 = 1 It's Irish Math



  #4  
Old October 18th 04, 11:52 PM
Colin D
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Developwebsites wrote:

I have a lot of photos I'd like to get reprints of, some enlarged
and scanned.
Is it better to scan them and crop and blowup on the computer or crop then
enlarge from negative then scan? Is the quality of the print(size of grain)
the same if I crop and enlarge a subject 3x to 4x6 as it is if I just enlarge a
4x6 3x and then scan and crop?

I have used ISO100,200,400 but dont remember which negs
are which. Some negatives do say 200 or 400 on the strip, some dont.


You have too many variables undetermined in your post for any definitive answers to
be given. Do you have negative scanning capability? and if so, what pixel count?
What image-handling program do you have - Photoshop, or similar? You mention
enlarging 3x to get a 6x4 print, so does that mean you have a larger than 35mm
negative, like 6x4.5cm, or did you mean a 4x enlargement?

In principle, you should scan the negatives and enlarge and crop in the computer to
produce files cropped, sized, tonally adjusted, and sharpened, ready for printing,
preferably on a Frontier machine. Printing first and then scanning introduces
another stage into the process of producing your final image, with the consequent
reduction in quality because of the intermediate print. Scanning a negative will
give better quality than scanning a print from the negative.

You don't say whether the negs are b/w or colour. If b/w, in my experience with
hundreds of archived family photos going back up to 100 years plus, a b/w scan will
print on a Frontier with excellent results, practically no coloration at all. Fuji
Crystal Archive paper has an anticipated life of about 65 years.

Colin

  #5  
Old October 18th 04, 11:52 PM
Colin D
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Developwebsites wrote:

I have a lot of photos I'd like to get reprints of, some enlarged
and scanned.
Is it better to scan them and crop and blowup on the computer or crop then
enlarge from negative then scan? Is the quality of the print(size of grain)
the same if I crop and enlarge a subject 3x to 4x6 as it is if I just enlarge a
4x6 3x and then scan and crop?

I have used ISO100,200,400 but dont remember which negs
are which. Some negatives do say 200 or 400 on the strip, some dont.


You have too many variables undetermined in your post for any definitive answers to
be given. Do you have negative scanning capability? and if so, what pixel count?
What image-handling program do you have - Photoshop, or similar? You mention
enlarging 3x to get a 6x4 print, so does that mean you have a larger than 35mm
negative, like 6x4.5cm, or did you mean a 4x enlargement?

In principle, you should scan the negatives and enlarge and crop in the computer to
produce files cropped, sized, tonally adjusted, and sharpened, ready for printing,
preferably on a Frontier machine. Printing first and then scanning introduces
another stage into the process of producing your final image, with the consequent
reduction in quality because of the intermediate print. Scanning a negative will
give better quality than scanning a print from the negative.

You don't say whether the negs are b/w or colour. If b/w, in my experience with
hundreds of archived family photos going back up to 100 years plus, a b/w scan will
print on a Frontier with excellent results, practically no coloration at all. Fuji
Crystal Archive paper has an anticipated life of about 65 years.

Colin

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Reducing File Size / Sharing Photos / Album Help Dave Digital Photography 10 September 16th 04 10:36 PM
safe guarding photos BJ Digital Photography 11 September 15th 04 03:04 AM
Recovering deleted photos from SDram memorycard Kimmo Vesajoki Digital Photography 7 August 4th 04 02:18 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:37 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.