Thanks, Ron, Realizing that the 6x6 records more detail, it at long last, occurred to me that I might be limiting it's recovery by using a single scan level for both formats. My excuse is that I was thinking (?) in terms of square inches rather that frame size.
Jack --- Ronald Arvidsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You will have more detail in the 6x6 since there is > more detail in the > 6x6 negative than the 24x36. Its two equations > basically > > resiloution6x6*resolution-scanner=scanned image6x6 > resolution24-36*resolution scanner= scanned > image24x36 > > However, you are right in the sense that you can get > out more of the 6x6 > if the scanner has the resoution allowing it. Still > I think if the > scanner is of high enough quality 100MB would > suffice. > > Cheers, > > Ronald > > Jack Davis wrote: > > >If a 6x6cm frame is scanned at 100MB and a 35mm > frame > >is scanned at 100MB, will the 35mm frame relinquish > a > >greater share of its information than will the 6x6? > >IOW, in order to achieve an equal scan saturation, > >would it be necessary to scan the 6x6 at 360MB? > (6x6 > >area =3.6 times that of the 35) > > > >Guess I don't have enough to do:) > > > >Jack > > > > > > > >__________________________________ > >Do you Yahoo!? > >Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! > >http://my.yahoo.com > > > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com
