on 10/21/03 2:04 AM, Eugene A La Lancette PhD MD at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 240 dpi is all that is needed. > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, October 20, 2003 9:07 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [filmscanners] Pixels and Prints > > I suspect I will 'go digital' sometime in the next year or two. My question > regards what type of print output quality I can expect from digital. > > I print on an Epson 2200 at sizes of up to 13x19 inches. In reality, I tend > to leave an inch margin or so around the image, so lets say an image size of > 11x17 inches. "Conventional" teaching with scans (and I suppose that this > could be part of the answer..that the conventional holds with scans but not > direct > digital acquisition) is that for critical sharpness you should be able to > send 300ppi to the printer. Say this is overkill and you really only need > 250 > ppi. By my calculations you would still need 11 megapixels fo an 11x17 > image at > 250ppi. Yet everyone raves at the output of even the Canon 10D at > significantly less resolution. So is the conventional teaching incorrect > when it comes > to direct digital capture? Perhaps more importantly, how many megapixels > are > needed for an extremely sharp 11x17 inch print? I realize there are other > benefits to digital capture as it translates to printing, such as lack of > grain, > but sharpness is quite important to me as well. I would appreciate any help > in how to look at this as I think about getting a digital body. Right now I > am using a 1V and a Polaroid Sprintscan 4000 Plus. A DS1 at 14 or so > megapixels and full frame sensor is way too expensive for me...but if a new > Canon EOS 3 > type digital body were to come out I could see spending up to $2500 or so. > > Howard > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ------------ > Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe > filmscanners' > or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title > or body > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ---------- > Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe > filmscanners' > or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or > body I agree that 240ppi looks pretty darn good. I can get that scanning a 35mm neg with the Minolta Scan Dual II. I've printed 12x18 on 13x19 watercolor paper and it looks pretty fine. Berry ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body