thegman
Veteran
Hi all,
I have some scans from 35mm film that I'd like to get printed at KodakGallery or somewhere similar. My scans are about 3000x2000 pixels, do you think that's sufficient for a 12x8" print? It works out at over 200ppi, so I think it should be OK, just want a second opinion.
The scans are of good quality, but I have a scanner at home which could scan at a higher resolution, I just wonder if it's worth the time and effort as the scans I have from the processor look good to me.
Thanks!
Garry
I have some scans from 35mm film that I'd like to get printed at KodakGallery or somewhere similar. My scans are about 3000x2000 pixels, do you think that's sufficient for a 12x8" print? It works out at over 200ppi, so I think it should be OK, just want a second opinion.
The scans are of good quality, but I have a scanner at home which could scan at a higher resolution, I just wonder if it's worth the time and effort as the scans I have from the processor look good to me.
Thanks!
Garry
Jamie123
Veteran
What's the dpi they print at? I suppose you should be ok at 200ppi but more would probably be better as most quality prints are usually done above 300dpi (unless we're talking big size prints).
How many frames do you want to have printed? If you only need a few frames you might aswell just scan them again on your scanner. If it's a lot and you don't want to do all the extra work I'd suggest you scan one frame at home and then send both the low and the high res files in for printing to see how they compare.
thegman
Veteran
Hey Jamie, I'll likely get maybe 6 done, so maybe it's worth the rescan effort. I can't find on Kodak's website at what resolution they print at although, they suggest 1,280 x 1,024 is the minimum for 12x8" which sounds far too low to me.
I think maybe at the weekend I'll rescan and get a couple print, see how it goes.
Cheers
Garry
I think maybe at the weekend I'll rescan and get a couple print, see how it goes.
Cheers
Garry
MCTuomey
Veteran
i have some recent prints done at 240 dpi that look good. also some at 180-200 dpi that aren't so good. so, for me there's a minimum for ordinary viewing distance: 240 dpi.
thegman
Veteran
Rescanning it is then!
januaryman
"Flim? You want flim?"
Good decision. I print 12x18 at 240 but 8x12l, usually I go 300.
Scanning? The better the scan, the better the print, I find, because of the greater amount of information available for PS or LR. So what I guess I'm trying to say is that the bigger the scan, the easier it is get a quality image that I can post-process more easily. You can down-sample/export (using LR) for a more manageable file size that places like MPix, which I used to use, can get you a great print from - even at at resolution equal to or lower than what you currently have.
The chain to a print is a long one, film to camera to negative to processing lab to scanner to pp software to paper selection to printer. MPix and labs are okay, but until I began printing my own, I had no real control over the final product.
Scanning? The better the scan, the better the print, I find, because of the greater amount of information available for PS or LR. So what I guess I'm trying to say is that the bigger the scan, the easier it is get a quality image that I can post-process more easily. You can down-sample/export (using LR) for a more manageable file size that places like MPix, which I used to use, can get you a great print from - even at at resolution equal to or lower than what you currently have.
The chain to a print is a long one, film to camera to negative to processing lab to scanner to pp software to paper selection to printer. MPix and labs are okay, but until I began printing my own, I had no real control over the final product.