Print Resolution of Scanned Image

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Ned Buntline, Mar 15, 2005.

  1. Ned Buntline

    Ned Buntline Guest

    Tell me if I'm right: If I have a film scanner that scans a 35 mm image
    with 3600 dpi, would that limit me to a maximum print size of 12" (length,
    using 300 dpi printing as a "photo-real" minimum and maximum print
    resolution)?

    Thanks ahead...
    Ned Buntline, Mar 15, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Ned Buntline

    bmoag Guest

    Not really.
    The limit is based on what you consider acceptable print quality.
    Depending on the subject matter of the print 200 dpi may yield good quality
    prints at even larger than 12'' sizes.
    bmoag, Mar 15, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Ned Buntline

    Eric Gill Guest

    "Ned Buntline" <> wrote in
    news:hatZd.4646$I16.1414@trndny03:

    > Tell me if I'm right: If I have a film scanner that scans a 35 mm
    > image with 3600 dpi, would that limit me to a maximum print size of
    > 12" (length, using 300 dpi printing as a "photo-real" minimum and
    > maximum print resolution)?


    You're right.

    Assuming you need 300 ppi. If we're talking about an inkjet printer instead
    of 150 or so line offset lithography, you'll likely be able to use a lower
    resolution (240 or so) and your prints will be fine.
    Eric Gill, Mar 15, 2005
    #3
  4. Ned Buntline

    C Wright Guest

    On 3/14/05 10:05 PM, in article hatZd.4646$I16.1414@trndny03, "Ned Buntline"
    <> wrote:

    > Tell me if I'm right: If I have a film scanner that scans a 35 mm image
    > with 3600 dpi, would that limit me to a maximum print size of 12" (length,
    > using 300 dpi printing as a "photo-real" minimum and maximum print
    > resolution)?
    >
    > Thanks ahead...
    >
    >

    Since a 35 mm image is about 1.42" in length you would get more than 3600
    "dots" in your scan - your would get about 5112. Therefore, at 300 dpi, a
    print would be about 17" wide
    C Wright, Mar 15, 2005
    #4
  5. Ned Buntline

    rafe bustin Guest

    On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 04:05:33 GMT, "Ned Buntline"
    <> wrote:

    >Tell me if I'm right: If I have a film scanner that scans a 35 mm image
    >with 3600 dpi, would that limit me to a maximum print size of 12" (length,
    >using 300 dpi printing as a "photo-real" minimum and maximum print
    >resolution)?
    >
    >Thanks ahead...




    35 mm film is approximately 1" x 1.5" so you've got
    5400 pixels in the long dimension and 3600 in the
    short dimension.

    At 300 dpi, you get roughly a 12" x 18" print.

    Don't take the 300 dpi figure as gospel, but as a
    suggested starting point. Large prints are meant
    to be viewed from farther away, so a lower dpi value
    (say, 200-240) may be fine.

    The nature of the image also plays a role, as does
    the paper surface. As a rule, glossy "photo" papers
    will benefit from higher resolution, while images on
    coarse-textured "fine art" papers can use much lower
    resolutions.



    rafe b.
    http://www.terrapinphoto.com
    rafe bustin, Mar 15, 2005
    #5
  6. Ned Buntline

    Ron Hunter Guest

    Ned Buntline wrote:
    > Tell me if I'm right: If I have a film scanner that scans a 35 mm image
    > with 3600 dpi, would that limit me to a maximum print size of 12" (length,
    > using 300 dpi printing as a "photo-real" minimum and maximum print
    > resolution)?
    >
    > Thanks ahead...
    >
    >

    IF you have a true optical 3600dpi scanner, then you have a very
    expensive piece of hardware, and likely wouldn't be asking this
    question. For a good scan of a 35mm slide, you need about 2700dpi, true
    optical resolution. Setting a 1200dpi scanner to produce a 3600dpi
    image is not productive of a better image than scanning at 1200dpi. For
    all the technical information you can use, and some sensible advice, go
    here:
    www.scantips.com


    --
    Ron Hunter
    Ron Hunter, Mar 15, 2005
    #6
  7. Ned Buntline

    rafe bustin Guest

    On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 04:20:25 -0600, Ron Hunter <>
    wrote:

    >Ned Buntline wrote:
    >> Tell me if I'm right: If I have a film scanner that scans a 35 mm image
    >> with 3600 dpi, would that limit me to a maximum print size of 12" (length,
    >> using 300 dpi printing as a "photo-real" minimum and maximum print
    >> resolution)?
    >>
    >> Thanks ahead...
    >>
    >>

    >IF you have a true optical 3600dpi scanner, then you have a very
    >expensive piece of hardware, and likely wouldn't be asking this
    >question. For a good scan of a 35mm slide, you need about 2700dpi, true
    >optical resolution. Setting a 1200dpi scanner to produce a 3600dpi
    >image is not productive of a better image than scanning at 1200dpi. For
    >all the technical information you can use, and some sensible advice, go
    >here:
    >www.scantips.com




    Ron, I believe there are a several reasonably
    priced film scanners these days with 3600 dpi native
    resolution. The Epson flatbeds (4870, 4990) can
    actually claim 4800 dpi optical resolution.
    Check out Pacific Image.

    Current filmscanners from Nikon, Minolta, Canon
    all deliver 4000 dpi optical or better.
    (Minolta delivers 5400 dpi for 35 mm.)

    2700 dpi was a good resolution for CCD filmscanners
    designed about four or five years ago.


    rafe b.
    http://www.terrapinphoto.com
    rafe bustin, Mar 15, 2005
    #7
  8. Ned Buntline

    Jim Guest

    "Ned Buntline" <> wrote in message
    news:hatZd.4646$I16.1414@trndny03...
    > Tell me if I'm right: If I have a film scanner that scans a 35 mm image
    > with 3600 dpi, would that limit me to a maximum print size of 12" (length,
    > using 300 dpi printing as a "photo-real" minimum and maximum print
    > resolution)?
    >
    > Thanks ahead.

    It might if you consider 300 dpi to be a hard requirement. It isn't. In
    fact, I can see little difference between 240 dpi and 300. In fact, I only
    notice a slight degredation at 180 dpi.
    Jim..
    >
    >
    Jim, Mar 15, 2005
    #8
  9. Ned Buntline

    Ned Buntline Guest

    Ron Hunter wrote:

    "IF you have a true optical 3600dpi scanner, then you have a very expensive
    piece of hardware, and likely wouldn't be asking this question."

    Actually, I have the Pacific Image PrimeFilm 3600Pro 35mm film scanner,
    which has a true optical resolution of 3600x3600 dpi.

    I ask this question because I am moving over to digital rendering of my fine
    art images, which I have worked in the "wetworld" for quite some time. My
    4x5 images I get scanned with a drum scanner at a local photo house. I
    bought the 3600Pro to do my 35mm negs. I'm just starting to understand
    digital imaging, so I want to understand what my maximum image size can be
    when printed from an Epson 2200. As these images are intended to be
    displayed in a gallery (and sold), I want to make sure I don't suffer image
    degradation by going to a lower print resolution than the file material will
    provide.
    Ned Buntline, Mar 16, 2005
    #9
  10. Jim wrote:

    > "Ned Buntline" <> wrote in message
    > news:hatZd.4646$I16.1414@trndny03...
    >
    >>Tell me if I'm right: If I have a film scanner that scans a 35 mm image
    >>with 3600 dpi, would that limit me to a maximum print size of 12" (length,
    >>using 300 dpi printing as a "photo-real" minimum and maximum print
    >>resolution)?
    >>
    >>Thanks ahead.

    >
    > It might if you consider 300 dpi to be a hard requirement. It isn't. In
    > fact, I can see little difference between 240 dpi and 300. In fact, I only
    > notice a slight degredation at 180 dpi.
    > Jim..
    >
    >>

    >
    >

    I have seen many people recommend (and I endorse this recommendation)
    that prints can be anywhere between 200 and 300 ppi.

    It depends somewhat on the scene. A foggy low key or noir image may
    look fine at 200 ppi. A high contrast backlit filigree scene, like
    wrought iron railings or something, may require the 300.

    The only hard and fast rule should be that there are no hard and fast rules.
    Don Stauffer in Minneapolis, Mar 16, 2005
    #10
  11. Ned Buntline

    Rick Guest

    Ned Buntline wrote:
    > Tell me if I'm right: If I have a film scanner that scans a 35 mm image
    > with 3600 dpi, would that limit me to a maximum print size of 12" (length,
    > using 300 dpi printing as a "photo-real" minimum and maximum print
    > resolution)?


    With a soft image you may be able to print it as low as 100dpi, if you need
    razor sharp lines then aim for 300dpi - That said it really depends on the
    subject matter and the quality of the original image.
    --

    Rick

    Digital Printing
    www.intelligence-direct.com - 01270 215550
    Rick, Mar 16, 2005
    #11
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Bun Mui
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    803
    Phantom
    Sep 13, 2004
  2. Neil

    Scanned graphic image issue, XP

    Neil, Jan 25, 2005, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    453
  3. P G
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    502
    Tom Monego
    Dec 30, 2003
  4. Roger Halstead

    Moon image comparrisons D-70 and Scanned

    Roger Halstead, May 29, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    309
    Roger Halstead
    May 29, 2004
  5. Ritter197

    Scanned photo turns out ok, but Print is much too Red

    Ritter197, Dec 12, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    356
    Chuck
    Dec 14, 2004
Loading...

Share This Page