Hi!
I use a Minolta Dimage Scan Multi with 6x7. My experience says it's good enough
for A3. I do my print by resampling the pictufres to 240 PPI in Photoshop.
The Minolta scanner has a nominal resolution of 1128 PPI, which is about 46
pixels per millimeter, making it into about 23 line pairs per millimiter this
is significantly less than what is available in a perfect 120 mm image.
Actual resolution of a scanner may be much lower, however. I have seen a test
in C't, where they calculated 135 resolution for the Scan Multi (2820 nominal)
to 1600 PPI, with the corresponding resolution for the SS 4000 to 2000 PPI.
My experience is:
- Scan Multi at 120 beat Scan Multi at 135 easily
- Partial image of 120 at full resolution is much better than full image at
1128 PPI
- 1128 PPI is good enough for A3 from (11.7" x 16.5")
Comparison is based on looking at A3 print on Ilfochrome and printout, with
at around 40-50 cm looking distance.
I had the same slides scanned on an Agfa Duoscan and the prints looked quite
similar. When looking at the scans in Photoshop the Scan Multi was
significantly sharper.
Check this page: http://home5.swipnet.se/~w-53694/html/scanners.html
Regards
Erik
Ontis, 07 nov 2000 you wrote:
> I'm looking to buy a scanner for medium format film. 6x6 mostly, some 6x9.
> As usual, they seem quite a bit more expensive than 35mm. I was hoping to
> get some recommendations from people on the list. I'm looking in the 2Kish
> range (usd).
>
> First a basic question:
> I'm outputting to an Epson 1270. What kinda resolution do I need from a 6x6
> neg make a 11x11inch print?
> If the current thread is true and 360dpi is the magic number (1440/4), then
> that says I need 3960x3960 pixel file, which maps to a 1586dpi scan. Which
> seems to say I need a scanner that'll do 1600. Does this seem reasonable, or
> am I smokin' dope?
>
>
> As far as dedicated film-scanners that'll scan medium format, the only one
> that seems affordable is a refurbished Polaroid sprintscan 45 (2000x2000).
> Neither the Minolta scan-multi or the Nikon LS-45000 have the resolution I
> think I need. I could stretch my budget a little a get a used leafscan 45,
> but that seems like a little overkill. Needless to say the imacon scanners
> are out of my range.
>
> I don't know much about flatbed scanners (I use a sprintscan 4k for my 35mm
> stuff). It seems like there are some flatbeds that might be reasonable. Has
> anyone had any experience with the Epson 1600, or any other flatbeds? How do
> they compare to a dedicated film scanner? It seems like they would suck for
> 35mm stuff, but maybe medium format is large enough for them to do a good
> job on negs?
>
> Would I be happier w/ a lower-res scanner that has a higher Dmax? Is my
> resolution guestimate to high?
>
> Thanks for your time,
> -Jonathan
--
!!!!!!!!!!!! New email address please update your address book !!!!!!!!!!
Erik Kaffehr [EMAIL PROTECTED] alt. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mariebergsvägen 53 +46 155 219338 (home)
S-611 66 Nyköping +46 155 263515 (office)
Sweden -- Message sent using 100% recycled electrons --
