whitecat
Lone Range(find)er
I'd like to hear some opinions on what size files everyone uses for a 35mm BW frame. I have my own opinion but am curious on what everyone else dose. I scan in tiff format.
rogue_designer
Reciprocity Failure
When I'm having them drumscanned, I get scans about 80mb (8-bit per channel, RGB) files from 35mm film. (Unless I need them larger for some reason).
But for shots I'm just playing with, and not specifically printing for a show (or my portfolio), I just scan to roughly 22mb files (2400dpi).
I rarely have 35mm film scanned 16-bit.
But for shots I'm just playing with, and not specifically printing for a show (or my portfolio), I just scan to roughly 22mb files (2400dpi).
I rarely have 35mm film scanned 16-bit.
Last edited:
venchka
Veteran
Don't trust my memory, but I think the 48-bit TIFF files from my HP scanner are in the mid-20Bb range. Something 24-25Mb. My old scanner doesn't do 16-bit grayscale. My new scanner will make 16-bit grayscale files. Stay tuned. I should have it in a week or two.
jalLee2001
jallee55
just a question, des 16 bit buy you anything in BW. I have read several times that it does not. Just wanted to confirm
payasam
a.k.a. Mukul Dube
The highest no fiddling resolution of my Epson V100 is 3200, so that is what I use for serious work. Files are about 35MB.
Photon42
burn the box
For the normal frame, I scan at 2400 DPI, 16 bit gray TIFF and 8 bit JPEG at the same time in Vuescan. After post-processing the TIFF, I overwrite the 8 bit JPEG with the new version (80% quality).
The 16 bit seem to give me more headroom for curve and level manipulations. The TIFF is about 7.5 megs, the resulting JPEG about 1.2 megs. When everything is done, I only keep the JPEGs, and of course, the negative
.
Cheers
Ivo
The 16 bit seem to give me more headroom for curve and level manipulations. The TIFF is about 7.5 megs, the resulting JPEG about 1.2 megs. When everything is done, I only keep the JPEGs, and of course, the negative
.Cheers
Ivo
craygc
Well-known
It buys a lot. The point being that you probably don't really need more than 8-bit when you're finished - although I always stay in 16-bit. However, B&W can often require some heavy lifting on the tonality side and that's where 16-bit really becomes your friend and avoids posterisation that 8-bit can easily leave you with. Even starting with an 8-bit image, you can gain in converting it to 16-bit before tonal manipulation then convert back after for the same reasons.
dmr
Registered Abuser
It may be overkill, but when I'm scanning a B&W negative for a nice print, I scan in color (search for previous threads on this topic with some tests), 3200 dpi, 16 bit. This makes a HUGE honking tiff file, 70 megs or so, but it captures everything up to and including film grain.
I then make a working copy, usually psd format, to do the actual clean-up and print.
I then make a working copy, usually psd format, to do the actual clean-up and print.
tmfabian
I met a man once...
there's a formula out there involving film size, output resolution and output size that gives you an exact number to scan at. Right now i forget it because it's pinned up in my office. You may be able to do a search for it, but tomorrow night when i get back from the office I can post it.
WoolenMammoth
Well-known
I would love to see that
Leighgion
Bovine Overseer
For casual stuff I scan at 2400dpi in 8-bit. My scanner will go to up 4800, and for more serious stuff I'll go either to 3200 or 4800 and sometimes 16-bit. Actually have some frames I need to rescan at the higher res soon.