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

"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

"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]?

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

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. )

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 have lots of tips about scanning on my web site:
http://robertdfeinman.com
follow the tips link on the home page.
Another go resource is scantips.com

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.

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

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.

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.