From: Phillip Murphy (pmurf@bellsouth.net)
Date: 12/02/02-05:25:13 PM Z
Hi Sandy,
I use Vuescan and Silverfast and find them both equally useful.
Genuine Fractals Print Pro 2.5 can be found on the LizardTech site.
http://www.lizardtech.com
(MrSid is part of a different package now)
The need for extending the dynamic range would depend on the negative material
used and it's inherent Gamma.
For an example of situations that would require a greater dynamic range, try
Paul Debevec's site: http://www.debevec.org/Research/HDR/
Use high bit scanning when possible: 16bit mode if you're using B&W materials.
best regards,
Phillip
Sandy King wrote:
> Phillip wrote:
>
> First, thanks for the information, and I have some follow-up
> questions and comments.
>
> >e you'll need to interpolate the data to scale up to 13x19, (I'm
> >assuming the target is for a 2880dpi or 1440dpi inkjet printer)
> >use the true optical resolution of the scanner. (2400spi)...
>
> That is correct. Will be printing with either an Epson C80 at 2440dpi
> or with a 2000P at 1440dpi.
>
> > If I'm not
> >mistaken, this scanner is capable of two pass scanning which you
> >can use to extend the dynamic range.
>
> If so I can't find anything about that in the manual. However, since
> I am scanning negatives, would there be any advantage to extending
> the dynamic range?
>
> > I recommend Vuescan software over
> >Epson's.
>
> I am working with SilverFast, not the Epson Twain software. If
> Vuescan better than SilverFast?
>
> > When you res-up the image in Photoshop or livepicture,
> >use a final ppi of 360 for the image. (this will give you slightly better
> >printer software interpolation).
>
> >
> >Using plug-ins such as MrSid or Genuine Fractals Print Pro (both from
> >LizardTech, Inc.) to res-up your image will give you a slight advantage
> >over
> >Photoshop's engine.
>
> Is there a site for downloading these files?
>
> >
> >Needless to say, if your goal is transcribing the negative or transparency
> >with accuracy, a film scanner will yield superior results hands down
> >unless you're
> >working with something on the order of a Heidelberg flat-bed scanner.
>
> I have to say that the quality I am getting from the Epson 2450 with
> the 5x7 negatives is really very good. Mark Nelson did a scan earlier
> this year for me from a 5X7 B&W negative using his Imacon Flextight
> scanner, at about 1600 dpi. I scanned the same negative with the
> Epson 2450 at the same resolution and frankly if there is any
> difference in image quality between the 13X19" comparison prints I
> made from the two scans it is not visible to my eyes. Mind you I am
> not saying that the 2450 is as good as an Flextight but for this
> particular application it appears to be.
>
> Best,
>
> Sandy
>
> >
> >best regards,
> >
> >Phillip
> >
> >
> >Sandy King wrote:
> >
> >> I have a scanning resolution question.
> >>
> >> Situation is this. I am scanning a 4 X 6.5" section of a 5X7" color
> >> negative with the Epson 2450 flatbed scanner, which has optical
> >> resolution of 2400 dpi, using SilverFast scanning software as a
> >> plug-in to PhotoShop. The eventual purpose of the scans is to make
> >> color prints approximately 13X19" in size, or to make negatives for
> >> alternative printing. I understand that a maximum resolution of a
> >> little over 300 dpi at the printing size is needed for either purpose.
> >>
> >> My question is this. What are the pros and cons of of the two
> >> following scenarios: 1) scanning at 100% of the 4 X 6.5" negative
> >> size at the maximum optical resolution of 2450 dpi, re-sizing later
> >> in PhotoShop, or 2) scanning at the desired printing size of 13X19"
> >> 300dpi?
> >>
> >> Sandy King
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 01/31/03-09:31:25 AM Z CST