Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: Photo lab's scan resolution

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    East, SG
    Posts
    2,641

    Default Photo lab's scan resolution

    Thinking of digitising some of my old negatives through the labs. Just wondering how many megapixels are the individual pictures going to be scanned? Asking this coz want to know if I can still do my own A4/A3 enlargement

    Thanks!

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Jurong West
    Posts
    397

    Default

    Saw 1 of the shop claim, they can archieve at 6MP.

  3. #3

    Default

    which shop is that?
    the one I asked is abt 3 MP 1280 x 1024.
    Gallery | Facebook Page Spreading the Good photography.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    6,405

    Default

    Originally posted by cillin
    Saw 1 of the shop claim, they can archieve at 6MP.
    Most labs can do 3072 x 2048 or thereabouts, which is 6mp. Foto Friend is one of them.

    Regards
    CK

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    S'pore, AMK
    Posts
    151

    Default

    FYI

    Colourlab which is using Fuji Frontier Machine

    Scan at 4-Base
    1818 x 1228
    $12 for processed roll

    Scan at 16-Base
    3360 x 2240
    $28 for processed roll

    For more details, goto
    http://store.yahoo.com/colourlabphot...st.html#35scan

    I used to scan at 4-base at Colourlab.
    Each JPEG file is about 600 - 700KB.

    Since I got myself a Nikon film scanner,
    I usually scan at about 3,700 x 2,500 pixels
    and save as JPEG file size at about 2 to 3MB.
    For important photos, I save in Highest quality (least compression) which result in JPEG file size of about 13MB.


    If the photo is to be used for publishing, I'll scan in CMYK (instead of the usual RGB) and save as 35MB TIFF files.


    You might want to try out 1 roll first & see whether is the results OK for you. I feel that the 700KB JPEG file is not even enough for A4. On my monitor, I can see a lot of grain / pixelation.

    Therefore if you've a lot of negatives to be scanned, you may want to consider getting yourself a film scanner. But take note that it's very time consuming.
    It normal takes my about 3 hours to scan 1 roll of 36 frames using my Nikon SCSI film scanner with Digital ICE on.


    BTW Soo Kee Colour at Raffles Place offer scanning at $5.90 per processed roll. New roll is $3.90.


    Best Regards,
    Tony

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    6,405

    Default

    Originally posted by Tony K
    FYI

    Colourlab which is using Fuji Frontier Machine

    Scan at 4-Base
    1818 x 1228
    $12 for processed roll

    Scan at 16-Base
    3360 x 2240
    $28 for processed roll

    For more details, goto
    http://store.yahoo.com/colourlabphot...st.html#35scan

    I used to scan at 4-base at Colourlab.
    Each JPEG file is about 600 - 700KB.

    Since I got myself a Nikon film scanner,
    I usually scan at about 3,700 x 2,500 pixels
    and save as JPEG file size at about 2 to 3MB.
    For important photos, I save in Highest quality (least compression) which result in JPEG file size of about 13MB.


    If the photo is to be used for publishing, I'll scan in CMYK (instead of the usual RGB) and save as 35MB TIFF files.


    You might want to try out 1 roll first & see whether is the results OK for you. I feel that the 700KB JPEG file is not even enough for A4. On my monitor, I can see a lot of grain / pixelation.

    Therefore if you've a lot of negatives to be scanned, you may want to consider getting yourself a film scanner. But take note that it's very time consuming.
    It normal takes my about 3 hours to scan 1 roll of 36 frames using my Nikon SCSI film scanner with Digital ICE on.


    BTW Soo Kee Colour at Raffles Place offer scanning at $5.90 per processed roll. New roll is $3.90.


    Best Regards,
    Tony
    On the LS30, if you don't do additional processing, it takes me only 1 minute to scan at 2700dpi with ICE enabled. If you have lots to scan, I think better to send to the lab. After you finish the 3rd roll, you probably won't want to continue....

    The 4-base can actually print 8R with barely noticeable grain. I've tried it. Remember that on a monitor, it's near the equivalent of a 25" x 17" print. These grain and all do not appear on A4.

    Unfortunately, Colour Lab's slide scans were rather disappointing. Neg scans are pretty good.

    Regards
    CK

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    S'pore, AMK
    Posts
    151

    Default

    Originally posted by ckiang


    On the LS30, if you don't do additional processing, it takes me only 1 minute to scan at 2700dpi with ICE enabled. If you have lots to scan, I think better to send to the lab. After you finish the 3rd roll, you probably won't want to continue....

    Regards
    CK

    Hi CK,

    Thanks for your reply.

    It took me 3 mins maybe because I'm using my 5 year old Pentium II 233Mhz PC with 128MB RAM.
    Do you think if I increase the RAM to 256MB, will it help a lot?

    Yes, it's really very time consuming & tedious to scan all the negatives. Till to date I've scanned about 15 rolls of negatives for the past 3 weeks. I actually enjoy doing it.
    But it's quite a nightmare when I think that I still got more than 100 rolls of negatives to continue....


    Originally posted by ckiang


    The 4-base can actually print 8R with barely noticeable grain. I've tried it. Remember that on a monitor, it's near the equivalent of a 25" x 17" print. These grain and all do not appear on A4.

    Regards
    CK

    Could you explain a little on the monitor 25"x17" equivalent?
    Is it something like although I'm using a 15" monitor to view a full screen of the JPEG file, it's output actually displays at 72 dpi and not at let's say 150dpi which makes me think that it's grainy / pixelated.


    One more question,
    as I'll be burning all the 2-3MB images to a 800MB CDR to share with many of my friends in my Youth Group, what do you think is the best & 'most compatible' way to do it so that they can view on all their PC & Macs?
    They'll also need to send to photo lab to print 4R & 8R photos.

    My current workflow is
    - I 'batch scan' the negatives using the Nikon Scan 3.1 software
    - Selected RGB (Adobe) as the colour space
    - Do Auto-Level for almost all images after Preview
    - Apply Digital ICE (Normal)
    - save in 2 - 3 MB JPEG (Good Balance) images
    - The files names saved corresponse to the negative s/n & frame nos. Eg '987601A.jpg' where '9876' is the s/n & '01A' is the frame no.
    - Create a few folders in the CDR.
    Each folder do not exceed let's say 50 photos.
    - attached freeware 'EXIF Image Viewer' for them to use to view the photos easily


    Sorry for asking so many questions at one go, but really need your help...



    canturn,
    Sorry for 'gate-crashing' into your thread.

    Moderator/s,
    Pls split this thread if you think it's necessary.


    Best Regards,
    Tony

  8. #8

    Default

    Also FYI,
    Fotohub also does 4Base & 16Base scans. If u do Kodak PhotoCD scans, u can even do 64Base!! (thats 7228x4820!)
    I've only tried slide scans with them, seems quite good...

    ..NuTs..

    Originally posted by Tony K
    FYI

    Colourlab which is using Fuji Frontier Machine

    Scan at 4-Base
    1818 x 1228
    $12 for processed roll

    Scan at 16-Base
    3360 x 2240
    $28 for processed roll

    ....

    Best Regards,
    Tony

  9. #9

    Default

    Had some negatives processed and scanned(4base) at Colour Lab recently and was barely satisfied with the results. There was a green cast to images in addition to dots and scratches, even though the negatives were freshly processed by them and none of this showed up in the prints, only on the scans.

    For those who own film scanners such as the Minolta Dualscan III, would the quality from that scanner surpass the 4base scan from Colour Lab?

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    6,405

    Default

    Originally posted by Zerstorer
    Had some negatives processed and scanned(4base) at Colour Lab recently and was barely satisfied with the results. There was a green cast to images in addition to dots and scratches, even though the negatives were freshly processed by them and none of this showed up in the prints, only on the scans.

    For those who own film scanners such as the Minolta Dualscan III, would the quality from that scanner surpass the 4base scan from Colour Lab?
    I can never get as good colours as theirs... though resolution wise, my 2700dpi scanner beat the 4-base flat.

    I don't have a green cast, scratches, etc problem with my scans there. Till date I must have done over 200 rolls liao, never encountered. Note that the scans might look overly grainy on screen, but that's fine. They are optimized for printing, not for viewing.

    Regards
    CK

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    6,405

    Default

    Originally posted by Tony K

    It took me 3 mins maybe because I'm using my 5 year old Pentium II 233Mhz PC with 128MB RAM.
    Do you think if I increase the RAM to 256MB, will it help a lot?
    256MB is barely enough. 512MB and beyond is about right.


    Yes, it's really very time consuming & tedious to scan all the negatives. Till to date I've scanned about 15 rolls of negatives for the past 3 weeks. I actually enjoy doing it.
    But it's quite a nightmare when I think that I still got more than 100 rolls of negatives to continue....
    You gotta be kidding. I'd rather go out and shoot than spend the time scanning 15 rolls.

    Could you explain a little on the monitor 25"x17" equivalent?
    Is it something like although I'm using a 15" monitor to view a full screen of the JPEG file, it's output actually displays at 72 dpi and not at let's say 150dpi which makes me think that it's grainy / pixelated.
    Something like that. If you have an image at 72ppi (I prefer to use ppi for images as it's more 'accurate'), and it's say, 1800 pixels wide, that's 25" wide. Of coz, this depends on the monitor itself, but the idea is there.


    One more question, as I'll be burning all the 2-3MB images to a 800MB CDR to share with many of my friends in my Youth Group, what do you think is the best & 'most compatible' way to do it so that they can view on all their PC & Macs? They'll also need to send to photo lab to print 4R & 8R photos.

    My current workflow is
    - I 'batch scan' the negatives using the Nikon Scan 3.1 software
    - Selected RGB (Adobe) as the colour space
    - Do Auto-Level for almost all images after Preview
    - Apply Digital ICE (Normal)
    - save in 2 - 3 MB JPEG (Good Balance) images
    - The files names saved corresponse to the negative s/n & frame nos. Eg '987601A.jpg' where '9876' is the s/n & '01A' is the frame no.
    - Create a few folders in the CDR.
    Each folder do not exceed let's say 50 photos.
    - attached freeware 'EXIF Image Viewer' for them to use to view the photos easily

    Sorry for asking so many questions at one go, but really need your help...
    JPEGs should work fine on Macs, and as long as you have a decent enough size for printing, it should be fine. Note that the images might have a different brightness/contrast when viewed on the mac though.

    Regards
    CK

  12. #12

    Default

    Originally posted by ckiang


    I can never get as good colours as theirs... though resolution wise, my 2700dpi scanner beat the 4-base flat.
    Hmm.. does that mean that you do actually get more real detail with your scanner than just merely more pixels? You're using a Nikon LS30?

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    6,405

    Default

    Originally posted by Zerstorer


    Hmm.. does that mean that you do actually get more real detail with your scanner than just merely more pixels? You're using a Nikon LS30?
    Yes, quite a bit more. I get ~3615 x 2475 pixel images which are around 25MB uncompressed. The 4-Base scans you get from labs are at most 10MB uncompressed. I have yet to try their 16-Base, so I dunno how it compares.

    Yeah, I am using a LS30.

    Regards
    CK

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    S'pore, AMK
    Posts
    151

    Default

    Hi CK,

    Thank you very much for your prompt replies & advices.

    Best Regards,
    Tony

  15. #15

    Default

    Originally posted by CYRN
    which shop is that?
    the one I asked is abt 3 MP 1280 x 1024.
    1280x1024 is only 1.3MP.

  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    453

    Default

    Originally posted by ckiang


    You gotta be kidding. I'd rather go out and shoot than spend the time scanning 15 rolls.

    Regards
    CK
    Here comes the fast food.....

    Buy a Nikon Digital Cam, put on the Slide Copy Adaptor, point it with your slide towards a Light Box, and you'll get your favourate slide picture on a 5 MPs digital format in less than 2 seconds each.
    Last edited by jasonpgc; 6th February 2003 at 06:34 PM.

  17. #17

    Default

    anyone tried scanning at RGB? what resolution do you get for 12bucks? i forgot to ask.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •