Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

   


   


   















      :: Filmscanners
Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: filmscanners: BWP seeks scanner



You don't directly mention the size of the prints you wish to produce,
although you allude with the 870 printer something like 8 x 12" or
smaller.  Unlike silver images, which simply have larger grain making up
the components of the image, without any true resolution loss, in the
digital realm, since even 4000 dpi scanners do not capture all that is
on a 35mm frame, you end up with softness and loss of detail if you go
too large.

If indeed you are going to keep to that 8" x 12" or smaller sizes, my
experience is that I get "grainy" B&W images with even a 2400 dpi
scanner when I enlarge to that size.  In fact, with unsharp masking,
which is necessary with any digital scan, you might find that with a
2700 dpi scanner, the grain of a 400 ISO film might even get exaggerated.

If you are mainly printing black and white, you might want to look at
Jon Cone's Piezography Inks, which allow for using four or six densities 
of black ink and special drivers to make very nice black and white prints.

His web site is www.inkjetmall.com

Art

Nicholas Hartmann wrote:

 > Apologies to those who saw much the same posting in DigitalSilver.
 > Apologies also for a longish introduction:
 >
 > I have spent 25 years with B&W photography learning to make 11x14
 > selenium-toned fiber prints that I like a lot. My kit consists of a 35mm
 > rangefinder camera with a few very good lenses, and Kodak TMax 400 film.
 > The reason for the fast film is that I take lots of pictures indoors 
in bad
 > light, and also that I actively dislike the "grainless" look of
 > medium-format or slow 35mm negatives. Because my lenses are good, much of
 > the fine image detail (when there is any) ends up sort of enmeshed 
with the
 > grain, and my 11x14 prints make that detail/grain nicely visible.
 >
 > So how do I retain this same "look" in a digital context? I've received
 > encouraging replies about the Canon and (especially) Nikon 4000 ppi
 > scanners, but I wanted also to check with the experts here. Let's 
assume I
 > have the latest version of Photoshop and a vigorous desire to learn 
to use
 > it; also a fast Macintosh with plenty of RAM; also an Epson 870 printer
 > that I will use until a mature B&W ink/paper situation gets shaken out.
 >
 > Is there any reason I should _not_ go for a Nikon 4000 ppi unit? 
Aside from
 > the software, I'm told, but I'm also told that VueScan works very nicely
 > for B&W.
 >
 > Thank you all in advance for your suggestions.
 >
 > -- Nick






 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.