I'll throw in my thoughts on the subject for free. 1) Epson flatbed 'film-scanners' just aren't the sharpest. They throw out lots of pixels, but not half as much detail. Their scans should be easily beaten on sharpness and detail by a good print 10" x 8" done on glossy paper. 2) If the flatbed scanner's focus is adjusted for its filmholder(s), then the focus on the glass platen will be less than optimal, and vice versa. 3) Even allowing for sub-optimal platen focus; the extra magnification of a 10" x 8" print should more than compensate and give a detailed scan from such a print. 4) Most proper, dedicated (i.e. not a flatbed) CCD film scanners of modest specification (3200~4000ppi) are easily capable of grain-sharp scans. Most flatbeds aren't. Why, then, are your scans from prints not sharp? The obvious culprit would be prints that aren't grain sharp to begin with, and this could be due to poor enlarger alignment, vibration during exposure, a poor-quality enlarging lens, or poor focus. All areas for scrutiny. Poor scan quality from a pin-sharp print can really only be due to poor scanner focus at the platen, or possibly a lack of contact of the print with the platen. Obviously, these are things that can't easily be diagnosed at a distance without seeing the setup, or any results thereof. FWIW. Some time ago I did a comparison of a 600ppi flatbed scan of a 10x colour print (effectively 6000ppi), with a direct 2700ppi scan of the negative. The detail in the print-scan was superior. I would expect a direct scan from a 4000ppi filmscanner to be much closer, as is a 24 megapixel digital camera copy of the same negative.