Nikon Coolscan 4000

[joel_stowe]

<p>I am looking at getting a used Nikon Coolscan 4000 and wanted to know if the scans would print from the files at

least up to a 16x20 print. Also does the print exceed what I would get from using the negative?<br>

Thanks Joel</p>

[Ed_Ingold]

<p>The rule of thumb is that you can enlarge film by a factor up to about 12x. For 35mm film, this would be 12"x18" for a print that can be examined closely. A lot depends on the subject and your (or your client's) expectations. The Nikon LS-4000 will not be the limiting factor in this decision.</p>

[Robin Smith]

<blockquote>

<p>I am looking at getting a used Nikon Coolscan 4000 and wanted to know if the scans would print from the files at least up to a 16x20 print.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yes depending on how good the original is - -personally I think about 1 in 30 35mm shots can be successfully enlarged up to 16 x 20; most you are better with 11x 14 or smaller. But the Coolscan will allow it (depending on film type) as it will be the quality of the original film/negative that determines the result.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Also does the print exceed what I would get from using the negative?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>What do you mean? Because of processing in Photoshop or similar you might be able to improve on the original with respect to dust spots and other items marring the image, but it stands to reason that you cannot get out more resolution, for example, than was in the original.</p>

[robert lee]

<blockquote>

<p>... if the scans would print from the files at least up to a 16x20 print.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yes, but with reservations. The scanner will faithfully digitize essentially all of the image information there is on the negative - that's all that can be asked of any piece of reproduction equipment. However, 16x20 is a real stretch for the film itself. With few exceptions, enlargements past a 11x14 print starts to be wanting technically.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Also does the print exceed what I would get from using the negative?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Versus what, a traditional enlarger? It's on par with the best of them. Getting an excellent print out still depends mostly on your own skills, be it wet darkroom or digital post. As with all good tools, the scanner doesn't get in your way.</p>

 

[h._cremers]

<p>The general rule of thumb mentioned is of course the general rule.</p>

<p>Depending on the film used and the subject matter, i have enlarged to 75x50 cm (roughly 30x20 inch). That was from Velvia 100F, properly exposed with not too much tiny detail (like small leaves in the distance), and quite some post-processing. In any circumstance, such an enlargement is not for up-close viewing.</p>

<p>By the way, i used an LS-5000 for that.</p>