Any shop scan film with at least 300dpi?

[harky]

Any shop scan film with at least 300dpi?

the reason i ask is i know alot of ppl think dpi is not important but actually is quite important to some

imaging u had 2 same photo. one scanned with 72dpi , one scanned with 300dpi (same size 3090 x 2048) u use photoshop to enlarge (zoom) 6 times...

u will see the diff between the both...

i notice some camera give 72dpi and 300 dpi but i compare the one i bring it to scan @ 1 neighbour lab... is not petty up to a standard compare to the one i took in my digital camera with a 72dpi...... i assume e dpi is not high euff...

It was scanned to to digital 16 base tiff
I had upload the jpg of the output of the photo from the lab
http://www.4shared.com/file/216732585/1bbd83bd/26000025.html


This is taking with my bro camera Nikon D80 save the raw file with 300dpi jpg
http://www.4shared.com/file/216857912/14c9e374/DSC_8696.html

 

[harky]

Think raw file is too up to a standard to compare

this was taking by my friend using a normal normal digtial OLYMPUS cam
it give out 341dpi
http://www.4shared.com/file/216889641/e3a4b234/P3170144_EDIT.html

 

[Clown]

dpi is a misunderstood term.

it stands for Dots Per Inch, similar to kilometers per hour, which does not tell you how far the car is capable of travelling.

it's NOT a representation of how good your digital file is.

overall image size is the real deal.

a 6megapixel image (roughly 3000 x 2000 pixels) can translate to a 6.7 x 10 inch 300dpi PRINT/SCAN, OR a 41.7 x 27.8 inch 72dpi PRINT/SCAN.

 

[Clown]

but if you're desperate for some good scanning, you can try epson showroom at funan and ask for a sample scan on their v700 scanner.
be prepared to bring home a 2gb tiff file if you're going for the highest res for your 645 negs.

 

[harky]

but acutally 300dpi is quite standard for now a day

with 72dpi i set it as wallpaper under 17 inch of my pc will started to show me some dot one the face

 

[harky]

no one can help?? i ask 2 shop they say they scan @ 72dpi

i refer to 3090 x 2048 @ 300dpi

 

[catchlights]

no one can help?? i ask 2 shop they say they scan @ 72dpi

i refer to 3090 x 2048 @ 300dpi

is not that no one can help you, is you still don't get it.

the dpi mean nothing, it does matter only when setting the resolution for printing.

if the pixel size is 3090 x 2048, whether is at 72dpi, 300dpi, or 1000dpi, the image pixel size is still 3090 x 2048.

when you send a 3090 x 2048 pixel image for lab print, at the lowest dpi (240) they use, you can get a 8x12 print without any pixelation.

 

[harky]

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
it make diff when u zoom in using photoshop
if u scan the same image 3090 x 2048 @ 300dpi and 3090 x 2048 @ 72dpi.. u enlarge u will see the diff...

do u use photoshop?

check this one
http://www.scantips.com/resolut.html
http://digitalmemoriesonline.net/scan/scan_processing/prints_vs_film_scanning.htm
http://www.scantips.com/no72dpi.html

Quote this from website
Most printers will give you excellent results at 300 dpi. So now take your 2,592x3,894 pixel scan, divide by 300 and you'll see what size print you can output. Depressing isn't it? That's why service bureaus still use drum scanners and professional photographers still pay to get drum scans. Your Nikon Coolscan will give you excellent results if you just want to print 8x10s on an inkjet printer, but for anything larger you'l need a drum scan.

i going to send for paper print.. so i dont want it to have it scanned @ 72dpi

 

[surrephoto]

it make diff when u zoom in using photoshop
if u scan the same image 3090 x 2048 @ 300dpi and 3090 x 2048 @ 72dpi.. u enlarge u will see the diff...

I really don't get what you are saying. I'm not even close to knowleagable with regards to film scanning, but if you scan at a different DPI, your pixel size won't be the same.

When you print, DPI matters because it reflects the density of the "dots" of ink printed on the piece of paper.

 

[Clown]

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
it make diff when u zoom in using photoshop
if u scan the same image 3090 x 2048 @ 300dpi and 3090 x 2048 @ 72dpi.. u enlarge u will see the diff...

do u use photoshop?

check this one
http://www.scantips.com/resolut.html
http://digitalmemoriesonline.net/scan/scan_processing/prints_vs_film_scanning.htm
http://www.scantips.com/no72dpi.html

Quote this from website
Most printers will give you excellent results at 300 dpi. So now take your 2,592x3,894 pixel scan, divide by 300 and you'll see what size print you can output. Depressing isn't it? That's why service bureaus still use drum scanners and professional photographers still pay to get drum scans. Your Nikon Coolscan will give you excellent results if you just want to print 8x10s on an inkjet printer, but for anything larger you'l need a drum scan.

i going to send for paper print.. so i dont want it to have it scanned @ 72dpi

like i said, go to epson showroom and ask them for a scan demo, or look in the services offered section where some forumers are doing scanning services.

 

[harky]

if u view the file in ur pc u will forever see the same until u zoom in with ur photoshop.

for real digital scanning must be xx X xx @ 300dpi.

I really don't get what you are saying. I'm not even close to knowleagable with regards to film scanning, but if you scan at a different DPI, your pixel size won't be the same.

When you print, DPI matters because it reflects the density of the "dots" of ink printed on the piece of paper.

 

[Cactus jACK]

harky - if your reference for why it has to be a magical 300dpi for scanning are those links provided, i suggest that you read them again keeping in mind the distinction between scanning and print.

i suspect that the confusion stems from equating scanning dpi with printing dpi. what you have said all holds true when printing, a min dpi would be roughly 300dpi, e.g. 6x4 @300dpi 1800x1200. if you sent 6x4 @72dpi 432x288 to the printers who prints at 300dpi, you would have too little detail to get a good 4R print, but surely you wouldn't do that. meaning, if you print 4R onto a medium that can print @300dpi, your min pixel count should be 1800x1200... more would be an overkill, substantially less would risk lost of some detail. of course, different mediums may have different dpi - canvas print, paper print, poster print, etc.

printing: medium size * medium dpi = min pixel size
e.g. (6inchx4inch @ 300dpi = 1800x1200)

but when it comes to scanning, the key subtly is in the quality of the scan (CCD, flatbed, etc), not just the dpi. when scanning a negative, your starting point is fixed, i.e. an approx 1.5inch x 1inch frame. similiar to the equation above,

scanning: frame size * dpi = output size
e.g. (1.5inchx1inch @ 4800dpi = 7200x4800)

certainly if it were really true that they scanned your 1.5inchx1inch negative @72dpi, your eventual scan would only be 108x72 pixels. in effect, a 3090x2048 must have been scanned at roughly 2000dpi. the higher the dpi, given a fixed nagative size, the larger your output file, e.g. @4800dpi your output file would be 7200x4800, with presummably more detail than @2000dpi output of 3090x2048... and scanning at @300dpi is only 450x300pixels. so in scanning, it's not really the dpi that is important to note, but rather the output file.

coming back to the printing, you can rescale your large image in photoshop down to the required 1800x1200 (assuming 4R @ 300dpi), and even from the 3090x2048 you have a lot of room to spare in terms of "additional" detail.

as for the comparison of your scan to the DSLR output... well, that's a whole other discussion...

i hope this helps...

 

[Dream Merchant]

I may be wrong, but I was under the impression that in scanning, bit-depth, besides the scanner's sensors or capturing device quality as well as the physical act of mounting e.g., wet mounting, anti-newton glass etc, was more important than dpi?

 

[harky]

i m nt a prof photographer nor a prof designer..
my friend is a designer, he scan film before... he say it is a must and better to have it scan at (e.g 3090x2048 @ 300dpi).
i dont know how a film scanner work but normal scanner work like this. Not matter what size u scan, if u choose the resolution to be save @ 72dpi or 300dpi, your output will have a big diff. u can compare by zoom.

When come to photo, u know something we do cropping (cut off the unwanted part) With a 3090x2048 @ 72dpi, how many part I can crop? With that dpi it look gd in 4r but if print on 8r it will be a lousy photo… (I think so I never try) with at least 300dpi the photo it still look nice.

I saw in one of usa website (i think so) they do save something like 3090x2048 @ 300dpi or 3090x2048 @ 72dpi

 

[Cactus jACK]

I may be wrong, but I was under the impression that in scanning, bit-depth, besides the scanner's sensors or capturing device quality as well as the physical act of mounting e.g., wet mounting, anti-newton glass etc, was more important than dpi?

you are absolutely right... the bit-depth helps with the dynamic and tonal ranges.

 

[grantyale]

Scanning 35mm slides/negs at 300 dpi will be 425-by-283 pixels only. The DPI values indicated in the files have no real meaning at all.
If you are scanning in a lab, ask them to do 64-base (25MP) scans for you. The ones you're having are 16-base (6MP).

 

[harky]

hmmmm but not all lab able to scan 64base...

if i plan to get my own film scanner.. can i get it scan e.g 64base??

target to get v600...

 

[yilishengxian]

Any shop scan film with at least 300dpi?

the reason i ask is i know alot of ppl think dpi is not important but actually is quite important to some

imaging u had 2 same photo. one scanned with 72dpi , one scanned with 300dpi (same size 3090 x 2048) u use photoshop to enlarge (zoom) 6 times...

u will see the diff between the both...

i notice some camera give 72dpi and 300 dpi but i compare the one i bring it to scan @ 1 neighbour lab... is not petty up to a standard compare to the one i took in my digital camera with a 72dpi...... i assume e dpi is not high euff...

It was scanned to to digital 16 base tiff
I had upload the jpg of the output of the photo from the lab
http://www.4shared.com/file/216732585/1bbd83bd/26000025.html


This is taking with my bro camera Nikon D80 save the raw file with 300dpi jpg
http://www.4shared.com/file/216857912/14c9e374/DSC_8696.html

1. When viewing on your PC, 3090 x 2048 pixels @72dpi is going to give you the same results as 3090 x 2048px @300dpi. The best quality your monitor is going to display the image will be based on your hardware settings and the number of pixels it can support at 100% view of the image.
2. If your monitor has a max resolution of 1280 x 1024, selecting the 72dpi or 300dpi image with 3090 x 2048px will not make a difference as the full screen wallpaper.
3. You're comparing (digital camera images - quality of digital camera) vs (film converted to digital images - the quality of the scanned image will depend on the quality of film and scanner you use).
4. A lower end scanner scanning at 6400dpi will also not give you a very good image as compared with a higher end model.
5. The Epson V600 has optical resolution of 6400dpi, which means you can get an image with approximately 9070 x 6047px (55mp image) from a 35mm film [approx 157mb file], but how good that image still depends on the type of film you use, you might get an image full of grains.
6. The dpi values are only useful if you intend to print (just for calculating purposes for the type of print), eg normal 4x6" photo @300dpi = 1800 x 1200px, so if you have enough pixels, you will get a proper print out.
7. I have printed A2 (23.4 x 16.5") size with images scanned with Epson V750 from 35mm film, and they do not have problems, you do not need a drum scanner for that.

 

[yilishengxian]

I may be wrong, but I was under the impression that in scanning, bit-depth, besides the scanner's sensors or capturing device quality as well as the physical act of mounting e.g., wet mounting, anti-newton glass etc, was more important than dpi?

Bit-depth is important to get better tonal and dynamic range from the image, that depends on the settings to scan with higher bit depth, and as well as the scanner OD capability. The nikon scanners allows you to adjust gain to get better tones, but that might increase image noise.

Focus is also an important factor to get sharp images from your scans, eg: v700/750 has height adjustment and Nikon scanners have autofocus.

Anti-newton ring glass is useful to keep film flat especially for medium format or larger film.

 

[harky]

i see i plan to get a scanner as i can scan some of my old photo

i had check out the price which around 10/roll for high end 64base..

but i have around 10-20roll that may cost $100-200.. may as well i get a own scanner..