[filmscanners] RE: 4000ppi

["" <robg@wordweb.com>]

Bruce <smthopr@earthlink.net> wrote:
> 4000 dpi might be mathematically 50% better than
> 2700 dpi--but the improvement visible to a human
> is small due to the limiting factors of film
> resolution, scanner optics, camera shake etc.
> I upgraded to a Nikon 8000 and can see a small
> improvement in resolution in scans but it is not
> dramatic and the scans are in focus for sure.

I've done some basic comparative scans between my Nikon LS30 and a SS4000.
 The results from the Polaroid had more pixels, but there didn't seem to
be much more image information.  I could get almost indistinguishable results
by resizing the Nikon's file with Paintshop pro.

> So, if someone reading this and wants to scan
> 35mm and has a limited budget--a 2700 dpi
> filmscanner may be a wise choice vs a flatbed.

I have yet to see great results scanning film with any flatbed.  But another
post in this thread made a good point which is that 4000ppi film scanners
tend to have far less trouble with "grain" artifacts than 2700ppi scanners.

Rob

-------------
How do you know if you never try?
(Rob Geraghty 25 June 2002)


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe 
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or 
body