Discussion:
optical image enlargement
(too old to reply)
Harry
2003-09-29 06:05:16 UTC
Permalink
Hello,

I am using an Epson Perfection scanner to scan some Super8 film strips.
But my scanner's optical resolution is not high enough for my needs and I
don't want to spend $300 for a 3200x6400 dpi scanner.

So I just though about building a ltitle lense-system to enlarge the super8
picture to about slide's size (~35 mm).

Has someone experience with such things, or can tell me a good website?

thanks,

Harry
Mac McDougald
2003-10-01 05:19:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Harry
Hello,
I am using an Epson Perfection scanner to scan some Super8 film strips.
But my scanner's optical resolution is not high enough for my needs and I
don't want to spend $300 for a 3200x6400 dpi scanner.
So I just though about building a ltitle lense-system to enlarge the super8
picture to about slide's size (~35 mm).
Has someone experience with such things, or can tell me a good website?
thanks,
Harry
Even if you jerry rig something, you're unlikely to gain anything. You're
still enlarging the existing data before scanning, effectively lowering
the rez as you make it larger.
Same as duping up to 35mm with slide dupe film, then scanning that. The
35mm would already be less sharp, etc.

Even at 4000ppi with film scanner, output options are pretty limited from
8/super 8. Especially since it would be a rare frame that was truly sharp
to begin with.

Mac
J. A. Mc.
2003-10-01 16:29:03 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 1 Oct 2003 01:19:15 -0400, Mac McDougald
Post by Mac McDougald
Post by Harry
Hello,
I am using an Epson Perfection scanner to scan some Super8 film strips.
But my scanner's optical resolution is not high enough for my needs and I
don't want to spend $300 for a 3200x6400 dpi scanner.
So I just though about building a ltitle lense-system to enlarge the super8
picture to about slide's size (~35 mm).
Has someone experience with such things, or can tell me a good website?
thanks,
Harry
Even if you jerry rig something, you're unlikely to gain anything. You're
still enlarging the existing data before scanning, effectively lowering
the rez as you make it larger.
Same as duping up to 35mm with slide dupe film, then scanning that. The
35mm would already be less sharp, etc.
Even at 4000ppi with film scanner, output options are pretty limited from
8/super 8. Especially since it would be a rare frame that was truly sharp
to begin with.
Mac
True for the most part. IF he could rig an aerial image system, he'd
at the very least get the resolution of the film. As is, he doesn't.

Even super 8 is capable of 4000 lpi (8000 dpi) as it's the same basic
stock as other transparencies. What the camera shot ... well ???
Mac McDougald
2003-10-02 06:53:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by J. A. Mc.
On Wed, 1 Oct 2003 01:19:15 -0400, Mac McDougald
Post by Mac McDougald
Post by Harry
Hello,
I am using an Epson Perfection scanner to scan some Super8 film strips.
But my scanner's optical resolution is not high enough for my needs and I
don't want to spend $300 for a 3200x6400 dpi scanner.
So I just though about building a ltitle lense-system to enlarge the super8
picture to about slide's size (~35 mm).
Has someone experience with such things, or can tell me a good website?
thanks,
Harry
Even if you jerry rig something, you're unlikely to gain anything. You're
still enlarging the existing data before scanning, effectively lowering
the rez as you make it larger.
Same as duping up to 35mm with slide dupe film, then scanning that. The
35mm would already be less sharp, etc.
Even at 4000ppi with film scanner, output options are pretty limited from
8/super 8. Especially since it would be a rare frame that was truly sharp
to begin with.
Mac
True for the most part. IF he could rig an aerial image system, he'd
at the very least get the resolution of the film. As is, he doesn't.
Even super 8 is capable of 4000 lpi (8000 dpi) as it's the same basic
stock as other transparencies. What the camera shot ... well ???
Also, true, sort of.
But a super 8mm frame (4 x 5.3) mm scanned @ 8000ppi will only yield a 5"
image at 300ppi.
I've scanned more than a few (admittedly at only 2700ppi) and have never
seen one that would look nice at 5" or larger no matter *what* rez you
could throw at them.

Of course, the $300 flatbed scanner he mentions actually resolves about
half of that 3200ppi it claims, line-pair wise (Epson, and all of them).

At any rate, you can "prove" it by simply having a photo print made from
one's best frame. Nothing better rez than that. Even though it would be
reversed, you can see the actual quality yielded, and you wouldn't do any
better than that no matter how you futzed it before scanning.

Mac
Mac McDougald
2003-10-02 06:55:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mac McDougald
Post by J. A. Mc.
On Wed, 1 Oct 2003 01:19:15 -0400, Mac McDougald
Post by Mac McDougald
Post by Harry
Hello,
I am using an Epson Perfection scanner to scan some Super8 film strips.
But my scanner's optical resolution is not high enough for my needs and I
don't want to spend $300 for a 3200x6400 dpi scanner.
So I just though about building a ltitle lense-system to enlarge the super8
picture to about slide's size (~35 mm).
Has someone experience with such things, or can tell me a good website?
thanks,
Harry
Even if you jerry rig something, you're unlikely to gain anything. You're
still enlarging the existing data before scanning, effectively lowering
the rez as you make it larger.
Same as duping up to 35mm with slide dupe film, then scanning that. The
35mm would already be less sharp, etc.
Even at 4000ppi with film scanner, output options are pretty limited from
8/super 8. Especially since it would be a rare frame that was truly sharp
to begin with.
Mac
True for the most part. IF he could rig an aerial image system, he'd
at the very least get the resolution of the film. As is, he doesn't.
Even super 8 is capable of 4000 lpi (8000 dpi) as it's the same basic
stock as other transparencies. What the camera shot ... well ???
Also, true, sort of.
image at 300ppi.
I've scanned more than a few (admittedly at only 2700ppi) and have never
seen one that would look nice at 5" or larger no matter *what* rez you
could throw at them.
Of course, the $300 flatbed scanner he mentions actually resolves about
half of that 3200ppi it claims, line-pair wise (Epson, and all of them).
At any rate, you can "prove" it by simply having a photo print made from
one's best frame. Nothing better rez than that. Even though it would be
reversed, you can see the actual quality yielded, and you wouldn't do any
better than that no matter how you futzed it before scanning.
Mac
Meant to add, you could have reversal print made if in color or just
negative print if b/w and reverse that after scan.

Mac
J. A. Mc.
2003-10-02 20:35:34 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 2 Oct 2003 02:55:35 -0400, Mac McDougald
Post by Mac McDougald
Post by Mac McDougald
Post by J. A. Mc.
On Wed, 1 Oct 2003 01:19:15 -0400, Mac McDougald
Post by Mac McDougald
Post by Harry
Hello,
I am using an Epson Perfection scanner to scan some Super8 film strips.
But my scanner's optical resolution is not high enough for my needs and I
don't want to spend $300 for a 3200x6400 dpi scanner.
So I just though about building a ltitle lense-system to enlarge the super8
picture to about slide's size (~35 mm).
Has someone experience with such things, or can tell me a good website?
thanks,
Harry
Even if you jerry rig something, you're unlikely to gain anything. You're
still enlarging the existing data before scanning, effectively lowering
the rez as you make it larger.
Same as duping up to 35mm with slide dupe film, then scanning that. The
35mm would already be less sharp, etc.
Even at 4000ppi with film scanner, output options are pretty limited from
8/super 8. Especially since it would be a rare frame that was truly sharp
to begin with.
Mac
True for the most part. IF he could rig an aerial image system, he'd
at the very least get the resolution of the film. As is, he doesn't.
Even super 8 is capable of 4000 lpi (8000 dpi) as it's the same basic
stock as other transparencies. What the camera shot ... well ???
Also, true, sort of.
image at 300ppi.
I've scanned more than a few (admittedly at only 2700ppi) and have never
seen one that would look nice at 5" or larger no matter *what* rez you
could throw at them.
Of course, the $300 flatbed scanner he mentions actually resolves about
half of that 3200ppi it claims, line-pair wise (Epson, and all of them).
No they do resolve 3200 ppi (pixels) but since it takes at least 2
pixels to make a line-pair and the chances of the transition falling
exactly ON the pixel boundary are small on the measuring 'chart', the
"resolving lpi" is rather much less than half the ppi (dpi) of the
scanner. On a continuous tone item, you get the full quality of the
scan.
Post by Mac McDougald
Post by Mac McDougald
At any rate, you can "prove" it by simply having a photo print made from
one's best frame. Nothing better rez than that. Even though it would be
reversed, you can see the actual quality yielded, and you wouldn't do any
better than that no matter how you futzed it before scanning.
Mac
Meant to add, you could have reversal print made if in color or just
negative print if b/w and reverse that after scan.
There's also 'positive' B&W paper.

Mac McDougald
2003-10-01 05:20:06 UTC
Permalink
Btw, meant to mention, if you want to kick it around more, post in
comp.periphs.scanners, much more active group. This one is practically
dead.

Mac
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...