You're Help/Advice Please re Scanner for Slides and Negatives

[Peter D]

First, take a look at the scanner bake-off tests I referred to earlier.
You won't find your HP 5470C even qualifies the entry level, let alone
matches the capabilities of dedicated film scanners claiming similar
resolution.

What bake-off tests?
What "HP 5470C? I have an HP 4050.
A scanner's inclusion might provide something worthwhile (a result, a fact),
but it's exclusion -- unless the reason you claim is actually stated
(another fact) -- is irrelevant.
Who said anything about matching the capabilities of a dedicated film
scanner claiming the same resolution? READ what I said. I made my choice on
the basis of several merging criteria (optical resolution, cost, and # of
slides it could scan at one time).

Don't believe that? Well try the second approach: download and test a
copy of Imatest and tell us what the MTF50 is for your HP scanner.

Where do I get this file? What is it?

Remember, you are making the claim that your scanner exceeds the
capabilities of any 2400ppi flatbed scanner on the market.

Huh? I think you're merging more than one person. Get back to me when you
figure out who you're talking to, OK? -- and keep taking the meds

 

[Rob.]

Re: "You will want to scan at 4000DPI"

I suspect that most people will scan at the highest resolution supported
by their hardware, but 2,700 DPI gives about a 10 megapixel image, and
4,000 dpi gives approximately a 22 megapixel image. 22 megapixels from
a 35mm image may truly be overkill, and may far exceed the actual detail
that exists on the average negative or slide shot with the average
camera and lens by the average photographer. But when you use 4,000 DPI
on hundreds or thousands of slides or negatives, the impact on both the
time required and the storage space required will be both real and
tremendous.

I would tend to agree with that.

My first scanner was the Nikon LS2000 2700dpi now have the Minolta Pro
4800 to scan MF images.

In the long run the 2700 sufficed for most scanning.