3000 or 4000 dpi for Fuji Provia 400X?

<p>I just sent a bunch of 6x7 Provia 400X slides off to Scan Café to have them scanned and I opted for the "Pro" service which will have my slides scanned at 4000 dpi instead of their standard 3000 dpi (Scan Café uses Nikon CS 9000 units for medium format) However, I just finished doing a little bit of research on slide film and found out that most MTF curves on chromes drop off rather precipitously after 3000 dpi, thereby suggesting that not much if anything can be gained by scanning them at higher resolutions. </p>

<p>Conversely, it seems that most folks ascribe themselves to the "more is always better" camp when it comes to scanning resolution. Just wondering which is the better approach for scanning chromes? And if necessary, I want to change my order if you fine folks think I should...</p>

<p>Thanks!<br>

Mike</p>

<p>

<p>It seems like it might be a good idea to have one of your better slides scanned at both 3000 and 4000 ppi to see if the extra cost buys you anything, before having a bunch scanned.</p>

</p>

<blockquote>

<p>It seems like it might be a good idea to have one of your better slides scanned at both 3000 and 4000 ppi to see if the extra cost buys you anything, before having a bunch scanned.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yup, hindsight always 20/20... but, it's not too late for me to call and have my order changed if need be. That's why I'm asking. ;~)</p>

<p>In theory, 4000ppi is about the max resolution you’d even need and a point where more isn’t providing any useful data. </p>

<p>Of course, 3000ppi of a good drum scanner after gel mounting the transparency is way, way better than 4000ppi of some desktop film scanner (the Nikon). </p>

<p>I'd love to see a 3000 ppi drum scan vs. a 4000 ppi Nikon scan of the same frame some time. Heck, I'd like to see a good drum vs. 9000 comparison, whatever the resolution.</p>

<p>But to the OP: the Nikon 9000 can't scan at 3000 ppi, only at 2000 and 4000. I'm not completely in the "more is always better" camp, but for chromes, scanning at 4000 ppi on the 9000 and then downsampling to the printing resolution works for me. I've not used Provia 400X, but understand it's surprisingly good. Here's my basic thought on the numbers: Provia 100F makes a nice 8x enlargement. That corresponds to a 2400 ppi scan (assuming printing at 300 ppi). So if you are using a Nikon 9000, you need to scan at 4000 ppi. A _good_ 3000 ppi scan also ought to be good enough, but if your lab is charging less for 3000 ppi, presumably, they're using a lesser scanner with a less careful workflow. Unless there's a lot of money involved, it's quite likely that 4000 ppi Nikon 9000 scans (if done well; this is another problem) will make very nice 16x20 prints and be better than anything cheaper. I'd send them another batch of frames to scan at 3000 ppi at a later date and slip in a few of the best of the batch you are currently having scanned and see what the difference is.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>the Nikon 9000 can't scan at 3000 ppi, only at 2000 and 4000</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Is the higher optical resolution?</p>

<p>Yes. The 4000 is optical resolution.</p>

<p>Thanks everyone. </p>

<p>David - you should really try 400X sometime. It's really wonderful stuff. Especially during the "magic hour" right before sunset, it really excels then (even more so with an 81A filter).</p>

<blockquote>

<p>But to the OP: the Nikon 9000 can't scan at 3000 ppi, only at 2000 and 4000.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>So what happens when you ask NikonScan or whatever for 3000dpi? Because the 5000 (the one I know) will certainly give you a scan that gives every appearance of being a 3000dpi scan.</p>

<p>Oops, you are right. The 8000 won't do a 3000 ppi scan, but the 9000 will. (And the 3000 ppi scan (for the Plus-X frame I happen to be looking at) looks pretty good.)</p>

<p>I checked Scancafes pricelist. The 4000ppi pro resolution service is 9 cents a frame more expensive than their regular service. </p>

<p>Please tell us whether the point of this question is whether you can save a whole 9c per scan. </p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>I checked Scancafes pricelist. The 4000ppi pro resolution service is 9 cents a frame more expensive than their regular service.<br>

Please tell us whether the point of this question is whether you can save a whole 9c per scan.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Funny. No, it's not about the 9 cents.</p>

<p>I was concerned that too much dpi on my slide scans would introduce "crap" into my scans, making them harder to deal with later in post or print. </p>

<p>Thanks for the good laugh this morning!...</p>

 

<p>You can always downsample later. At $0.09 you might as well have the extra resolution, in case you want to do things like make 48"x60" prints for walls or clients who happen to be giants.</p>

<p>Phew! The 4000 will be better than the 3000, though the extent will vary from image to image. </p>

<p>" At $0.09 you might as well have the extra resolution,"</p>

<p>I don't think he'll be getting much out of 400X beyond 2500ppi. I love it, it's my favorite all around color film, but it's not the highest resolution film out there. And why waste time and space with downconverting if 4000ppi isn't necessary?</p>