Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/07/16
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 07:56 PM 7/16/2003 -0700, khmiska wrote: >Gentlemen, >My dry "darkroom" consists of Photoshop 7, a Canon S900 printer and an >Epson 2400 scanner. I shot some K'chrome 64 with my M2 and a >Voigtländer 21/4. > >I learned a valuable lesson. I scanned the 'chromes in at 400 dpi and >printed them at 400 dpi as 8 x 10s. What a disappointment. Then the >proverbial light bulb went on over my cranium and I rescanned the >slides at 1200 dpi and printed them at 400 dpi. The difference is >marked. ? 400 dpi scanning? Wheee... To do "serious" work, you should get a negative scanner. They have come down in price so you can get a good one for under $400, I think. I personally use a Nikon LS-4000 but I heard the Canon FS4000 and the new Minolta is as good in most areas for a lot less. >Question - should I scan at still higher resolution? If so, what res? Scan it at the highest resolution you can, on a negative scanner. On a flatbed, I think higher than certain amount, it is interpolating it anyway, so there is no need to do so. >Should I print at a higher res? If so what? I think the conventional wisdom is to print at 300 dpi, and there is no need to go any higher. I used to print at 360dpi to match the multiple of the printer resolution, but I don't see any difference. There is minimal gain to be have to print at 720 / 1440 /2880 on the newer printers. Good luck! // richard <http://www.imagecraft.com> <http://www.dragonsgate.net/mailman/listinfo> - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html