Scanning

[Beyder28]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hey all, I just wanted to get some advice on what to tell a film lab about type of scans Im looking for. I would like to get my images scanned so that when I send them out to be printed, I can print 16x24 with no degradation of quality. Not sure what they use as a scanner but I know that the last time I had the pics scanned on to a CD, the jpegs were all 8MB in size. They did not seem to be very high quality at that size. Any advice is appreciated.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[CalArts 99]

I would suggest that you use the same commercial studio to do both the scanning and the printing. In other words, rather than getting scans done ahead of time just in case you decide to print later, do the scanning and printing at the same time and at the same place. You will get the best quality of print that way since there is only one 'chef' mixing all the ingredients for the final product.

[Beyder28]

Any advice for the scanning quality?

[too old to care]

I was waiting for an answer too, but since no one has offered any advice I must assume that most people have the same experience as I do, it is hard to get a "really good" 16x24 print from a 35mm negative.

 

When I worked as a full time wedding photographer (1971 through 1982) I sold lots of 11x14 and 16x20 prints. I used TLR's Mamiya's because I never could get a good print from a 35mm in that size. The detail of the lace on the wedding dress, etc., just did not have the snap people expected from a professional photographer.

 

I tried to use 35mm a couple of times (Leica and Pentax) and just was not happy. My labs (I used two of them) even told me that I would be disappointed when I brought in 35mm negatives and asked them to go to a 16x20 print.

 

Even today, I can see the difference from the negative sizes (6x6 vs 35mm) in anything over 8x10, no matter if it is a wet print or a scanned print. Unless someone else has a better answer, I believe your best bet is to shoot a larger negative.

[CalArts 99]

There is no specific 'magic' formula. It's going to depend on final output. This is why I hinted at having the scan done by the same studio at the time of printing and not ahead of time. A 'print' means a lot of things: are you wanting a Lambda print? An inkjet print? Etc., etc..

 

Most commercial studios charge for scanning by the mb. You'll need a certain file size to a given print size when printing at the native dpi of a particular printer. You need to determine size (eg, 16x20) and what type of print.

 

Sampling at 4000-6000 spi with a drum scanner will get to the grain of a 35mm film frame. The other advantage of the PMT type scanner is getting a high Dmax and so you'll get a wide dynamic range to work with from the scan (you want to try to take advantage of that film.) In addition, you'll have noise control (of the grain) and sharpening available for the scanned file which gives you more control over conventional wet printing.

 

As far as whether 16x20 is 'too big' for 35mm frame, that depends on a lot of variables. Foremost is the subject matter. You can make large prints from 35mm but the subject matter and the look you are trying to achieve will be the important and determining factor. There are certain conventions a viewer uses when looking at prints. Landscapes are usually expected to have fine detail whereas candid portraits with visible grain and 'coarser' details can be acceptable and okay (viewing distance is also one of those conventions.) You also have to take in consideration the ISO of the film and the grain pattern (conventional grain versus tabular grain, etc..) A 25 ISO piece of 35mm film versus a 400 ISO 35mm film will obviously look different.

 

There's also the consideration of the substrate when making inkjet prints. A Lambda or Océ print will be printed on RA-4 paper so those prints are normally on substrates such as Fuji Crystal Archive or Ilford Galerie FB Digital (same as an analog wet print.) With inkjet there's a wide variety of papers that have an affect on visible sharpness, etc..

 

Again, I personally would consider having small scans made from your film at the time of processing to use as cataloging and monitor viewing (a digital proof sheet.) Then when you make the choice to go for a large print, have the scan and print made using the same lab so everything is handled by the same place from beginning to end.