Highest resolution value for films or slides

  • Thread starter Thread starter il barbi
  • Start date Start date
I

il barbi

I suppose the highest value of resolution one can correctly
choose when scanning films or slides is up to the film
characteristics, primarily sensibility and so on. So e.g.
for Kodak Elite Chrome 100 I think Kodak itself must be able
to tell me something as: "Just scan a 35 mm slide at no more
than 2400 dpi"
Do you agree?
il barbi
 
il barbi said:
I suppose the highest value of resolution one can correctly
choose when scanning films or slides is up to the film
characteristics, primarily sensibility and so on. So e.g.
for Kodak Elite Chrome 100 I think Kodak itself must be able
to tell me something as: "Just scan a 35 mm slide at no more
than 2400 dpi"
Do you agree?
il barbi
Click to expand...
No. It will never hurt to scan at too high a resolution, it's just a case of
diminishing returns. And if your final print size doesn't need the
resolution then it's a waste of time.
 
Ken said:
No. It will never hurt to scan at too high a resolution, it's just a case of
diminishing returns. And if your final print size doesn't need the
resolution then it's a waste of time.
Click to expand...

Diminishing returns and burgeoning file sizes.

Downsampling my Elite 5400 scans to 4000dpi cuts file size almost in half.
 
Diminishing returns and burgeoning file sizes.

Downsampling my Elite 5400 scans to 4000dpi cuts file size almost in half.
Click to expand...

I suspect the film used and the camera lens used would both make
a difference in the amount of detail recorded (to be scanned "out").
Another factor is the *real* resolution of the scan. Saying "to make
a 2400 dpi scan" or saying "scan using the max resolution on my 2400 dpi
scanner" (which seems to be the same thing) can very well be dramatically
different statements.

If one were to look at the lp/mm ratings for the film then quadruple that
(double because its line *pairs* and double again for nyquist sampling
sort of reasons) one then may have the maximum useful scan resolution
based only on the film. Use numbers for the lens instead, if it's
significantly lower than the film's ratings.

That said, would it be better to down-sample to cut file size or would
it be better to do a 48->24 bit reduction (and as part of that maybe
use a low-compression jpeg rather than TIFF)? Or maybe low-compression
jpeg2000?

Mike
 
Back
Top