Scanning Pictures

[Sharon Sims]

Hi,

I have a 2 x 3 snapshot that I need to enlarge to a 8 x10. At what
resolution should I scan to get a good quality 8 x 10 picture? Thanks!!

 

[Jim]

Hi,

I have a 2 x 3 snapshot that I need to enlarge to a 8 x10. At what
resolution should I scan to get a good quality 8 x 10 picture? Thanks!!

You do realize that you can't simply enlarge a 2x3 print to 8x10? Without
cropping, the final size will be either 8x12 or 6 2/3 x 10.

As for your question, you will need between 180 and 240 pixels per inch in
the final print (depending on what you believe to be a good quality
picture).

Therefore, you will need to 8x240 (1920) pixels along the 2 inch dimension.
Thus, you should scan at 960 dpi to be able to obtain the required number of
pixels.

Jim

 

[Charlie]

Hi,

I have a 2 x 3 snapshot that I need to enlarge to a 8 x10. At what
resolution should I scan to get a good quality 8 x 10 picture? Thanks!!

You should spend some time at Wayne Fulton's web site,
www.scantips.com.

First, your 2 x 3 snapshot will enlarge to 8 x 12 (4x magnification on
each dimension), so to get it to 8 x 10 you'll have to crop the long
side some.

Second, there's no magic way to transform a 2 x 3 snapshot into a good
quality 8 x 10 (or 8 x 12). It will look like a very soft/fuzzy
enlargement.

But since you need 4x enlargement per side, I'd suggest scanning at
800 ppi and then printing the resulting image at 200 ppi. Scanning 2"
at 800 ppi gives 1600 pixels in the short dimension, then printing at
200 ppi gives 8 inches in the final print, which is what you want in
the short dimension.

Charlie Hoffpauir
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~charlieh/

 

[Aaron Queenan]

"Charlie" {[email protected]} wrote in message
} On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 21:33:15 -0500, "Sharon Sims"
} {[email protected]} wrote:
}
} }Hi,
} }
} }I have a 2 x 3 snapshot that I need to enlarge to a 8 x10. At what
} }resolution should I scan to get a good quality 8 x 10 picture? Thanks!!
} }
}
} You should spend some time at Wayne Fulton's web site,
} www.scantips.com.
}
} First, your 2 x 3 snapshot will enlarge to 8 x 12 (4x magnification on
} each dimension), so to get it to 8 x 10 you'll have to crop the long
} side some.
}
} Second, there's no magic way to transform a 2 x 3 snapshot into a good
} quality 8 x 10 (or 8 x 12). It will look like a very soft/fuzzy
} enlargement.
}
} But since you need 4x enlargement per side, I'd suggest scanning at
} 800 ppi and then printing the resulting image at 200 ppi. Scanning 2"
} at 800 ppi gives 1600 pixels in the short dimension, then printing at
} 200 ppi gives 8 inches in the final print, which is what you want in
} the short dimension.

I'd add one point to that - rather than scanning at 800 dpi, scan at an even
division of your scanners actual resolution. If your scanner supports 1200
dpi, then 600 dpi will give a better scan than 800 dpi, because at 800 dpi
the scanner will smudge every other pixel it.

You could scan at your scanner's native resolution, but you'll probably find
no benefit above 1200 dpi, because even in a photographic print, the
resolution is probably not that good.

Regards,
Aaron Queenan.

 

[Charlie]

"Charlie" {[email protected]} wrote in message
} On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 21:33:15 -0500, "Sharon Sims"
} {[email protected]} wrote:
}
} }Hi,
} }
} }I have a 2 x 3 snapshot that I need to enlarge to a 8 x10. At what
} }resolution should I scan to get a good quality 8 x 10 picture? Thanks!!
} }
}
} You should spend some time at Wayne Fulton's web site,
} www.scantips.com.
}
} First, your 2 x 3 snapshot will enlarge to 8 x 12 (4x magnification on
} each dimension), so to get it to 8 x 10 you'll have to crop the long
} side some.
}
} Second, there's no magic way to transform a 2 x 3 snapshot into a good
} quality 8 x 10 (or 8 x 12). It will look like a very soft/fuzzy
} enlargement.
}
} But since you need 4x enlargement per side, I'd suggest scanning at
} 800 ppi and then printing the resulting image at 200 ppi. Scanning 2"
} at 800 ppi gives 1600 pixels in the short dimension, then printing at
} 200 ppi gives 8 inches in the final print, which is what you want in
} the short dimension.

I'd add one point to that - rather than scanning at 800 dpi, scan at an even
division of your scanners actual resolution. If your scanner supports 1200
dpi, then 600 dpi will give a better scan than 800 dpi, because at 800 dpi
the scanner will smudge every other pixel it.

You could scan at your scanner's native resolution, but you'll probably find
no benefit above 1200 dpi, because even in a photographic print, the
resolution is probably not that good.

Regards,
Aaron Queenan.

Ordinarily, your comment would be accurate. However, the OP is
scanning a 2 inch by 3 inch snapshot. The actual resolution is
probably around 200 pixels per inch, certainly not more than 300. so
scanning at more than 300 ppi only increases the size (in pixels) of
the image, not the resolution. So the scanner isn't really "smudging"
pixels, it's really creating more pixels. So it probably doesn't
matter if it creates at 800 or 1200. Or you could even scan at 300 and
create the extra pixels by upsizing in Photoshop, and get similar
relults. However, from the question posed by the OP, my assumption was
that he didn't have Photoshop, or probably any other image editing
program, so I gave the figures for a reasonable upsizing of the image.
Charlie Hoffpauir
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~charlieh/