 Jack K. Hartsock |
Diditizing 35 film When digitizing 35mm film,what is the usual result in pixels ratios? I have a lot of money tied up in 35mm equipment and would like to do large format pics but don't wish to buy new digital cameras.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Kerry L. Walker |
What do you mean by large format pictures? When referring to large format, one usually means 4x5 or 8x10 film cameras.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Christopher A. Vedros |
Can't you still do it the old fashioned way, where a lab actually makes an enlargement from the negative?
|
|
|
|
||
|
Kerry L. Walker |
Wow, can you still do that?
|
|
|
|
||
|
John P. Sandstedt |
Chris and Kerry - You guys are too much. Jack - When you scan a negative or print, you get to set the number of dpi and also the desired size of the print. This choice is, of course, dependent on your scanner. I always scan at 600/1200 dpi; of course, this results in very large files even if you select a 4" X 6" print. Before I print, however, I switch to the magic 300 dpi; most inkjets can't do any better even if provided a file with greater than 300. Remember, pixels are a digital thing - and don't really have any true relationship to negatives and slides. Pixels do relate, primarily, to the way an image is recorded and/or displayed on the monitor. And, when shown on the monitor, more than 72 ppi is a waste, too. Of course, Pop Photo just did itself all manner of embarrassment by publishing an article saying a digital SLR's prints finally equalled those produced from ISO 100 film. That camera, however, only costs $8,000 - an amount all of us can easily afford for our hobby.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Vince Broesch |
For scanning film, I would suggest a resoulution of 2400/3600 DPI (better refered to as SPI, samples per inch). That should result in a file around 1800 by 2700 pixels, such a file could be printed to 8x10 at around 250 DPI without resampling (intrepolation). Vince
|
|
|
|
||
|
Steve Warren |
Hi, Not to get off-topic, but I just had to say a big THANK YOU to john for pointing out the Pop Photo article. Until I can get comparable image quality for a comparable price, film is the way to go. As far as digitizing the film, I take and develop my own BW 35mm negs, then scan them with my Epson RX500 AT 2400 dpi They say digital pays for itself, well, it doesnt. Paper and ink are not free.
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||