Ender100@aol.com
Date: 12/01/02-06:22:54 PM Z
Hi Sandy,
If your only purpose is to make the digital negative then I would scan at the
target size of 13 x 19 and resolution of 300 ppi. That way you have no
artifacts at all... However there is one issue that relates here... what is
the true optical resolution of your scanner? I am assuming it is 2450.
2450/300 gives 8.167. Sooooo you probably want to scan at maximum optical
and resize later in Photoshop. Also, if you decide to crop more, you still
have enough pixels to make a 300 ppi image at a larger size.
Some people are doing their upsampling and downsampling in increments rather
than one fell swoop.... I am not sure it matters that much, but you can
probably find info on this on the web. If I remember correctly, there is an
action floating on the internet that will do a series of upsamplings at 1.10%
till you get the size you want. I suppose you could test both ways and see
which seems to work the best.
After saying all of this, I am not sure it really matters a whole lot if you
do a good scan in the first place. There are other factors that can have a
more deletorious effect on the scan then the issues you raised.
There ... is that non-committal enough? heheheeh
Mark Nelson
In a message dated 12/1/02 12:56:00 PM, sanking@clemson.edu writes:
<< 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? >>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 01/31/03-09:31:25 AM Z CST