Lee, I'm curious what size in megabytes would an average 8 x 10 colour print be scanned at 1200 ppi and how much longer to scan that compared to one at 300 ppi. I think for most people here going with 300 ppi initially would be sufficient especially if you are doing a lot of old prints. Or at least I'm trying to convince myself of that as I just did a wack of old family snaps that way. I can't really see them being used commercially at any time. Chuck
Chuck, few people would need to scan a colour 8 x 10 print at 1200ppi. I wasn't suggesting that. However, if you were scanning 8 x 10 line art, like a logo or solid colour poster, you might want to. The two important factors are: - the size of the original compared to the required output size (e.g. you need to enlarge the size); - the colour depth of the original, e.g. is it monochrome, greyscale or full colour. For a 1:1 reproduction of a full colour original then 300ppi is sufficient for most uses. (Assuming the full colour original is a print made from a 35mm colour film negative) Lee
Lee, thanks for that. I hate to think I should have gone bigger, so that puts my mind at rest a little. On top of that I probably would need a better computer to deal with those enormous files that result from higher ppi's. Oh and I looked for your picture Ron, but couldn't find it. Chuck
Chuck, as long as we're talking about 8 x 10 prints that originated from 35mm colour negative then 300ppi is fine. For a black and white 8 x 10 print from a 35mm negative, personally I would be looking to scan at 600ppi. But of course input resolution is just part of the equation as far as quality scanning is concerned ;-) Lee
Just going through some (very) old threads and although this was probably sorted a long time ago I thought I would give it a go and see how it turned out. Don`t know anything about pixels and scanning settings so just worked off the original image in post #1. Kyle