how do you get your large format images on the web

[rkmiec]

i am shooting 4x5 now and i want to know how you guys with websites are getting your 4x5 images onto the web.are you scanning the finished print or the negative and photoshoping a similar result of your final print.which scanner are you using and finally include your web page if you can so i can see.i have a web page but nothing on it yet and i have been wondering about this for a long time.if you go to a photogs page you see amazing images.i want to make sure when i am ready to post here or on my page i want to get the best out of my images.thanks guys.

 

[Ole]

All of the above.

I prefer to scan prints, but I have a preference for printing on 24x30cm paper, which won't fit in my scanner. Sometimes I make a smaller print just for scanning, sometimes I scan the negative and "tweak" it to match the print. Slides get scanned anyway, and I only adjust the colours and saturation until it looks like the original.

My scanner is an old (in computer years, at least) Agfa Duoscal T1200, which can scan film up to 8x10". It doesn't have enough resolution to make a decent scan from 35mm, but that doesn't really matter for getting a 4x5" (or 5x7") on the web, does it?

Dead Link Removed

 

[Jon Shiu]

For scanning 11x14 prints I bought a Epson 836xl but don't have room for it anymore, so will probably just print a 8x10 in the darkroom to scan on a regular size scanner.

Jon

 

[jimgalli]

I scan roughly 75% prints / 25% negs on an Epson 1640XL with the lamp in the lid for negs. I can scan up to 11X14 negs with it. I scan 14X17 in two halves and stitch. Seems to work well. You get better as you go. For web, I resize down in the 750 - 900 pixel width. Lots of folks go smaller, but I can't tolerate any more loss than that. Sharpen only after you've re-sized for the web, and err on the side on LESS. You see way too many crappy little oversharp jpg's on the web. One trick that works well for me is to scan an 8X10 at 150 dpi, do any corrections dust spots etc, then resize one time to 75 dpi. The algorithms from 150 to 75 seem to show no loss at all from what I saw on screen and the original 150 is enough to not get kinks etc in curved lines. For just a bit of added depth, try scanning in color, then in levels, ramp up some yellow and red until you've got a semi nasty looking baby poop brown, then de-saturate 94 - 96%. The tiny bit of color left can just look like the slightest bit of warm tone.

 

[PHOTOTONE]

I scan my web images from LF, because I use scanning as a way to proof and evaluate the negatives I may want to print in the wet darkroom. I also experiment with dodging and burning on the scan, before wasting paper in the darkroom.

 

[Ted Harris]

Color transparencies I always scan from the film. Black and white is a tossup but I usually scan that from the negative as well. Then I have a high end scanner (Screen Cezanne) to work with.

 

[jovo]

Some images go directly to 11x14 prints, so I scan the negative on an 'obsolete' Epson 3200 scanner and match the print as well as I can. Other images I'm less sure of, or ones I think are better served being smaller, become 8x10 prints and are scanned directly that way. I can't ever remember a photograph that went to the web without at least a minor tweak to make it look like the print. There are about 52 of them on my gallery, or just a few of the same ones on this new blogspot site:


www.johnvossphotography.blogspot.com

 

[jstraw]

I scan roughly 75% prints / 25% negs on an Epson 1640XL with the lamp in the lid for negs. I can scan up to 11X14 negs with it. I scan 14X17 in two halves and stitch. Seems to work well. You get better as you go. For web, I resize down in the 750 - 900 pixel width. Lots of folks go smaller, but I can't tolerate any more loss than that. Sharpen only after you've re-sized for the web, and err on the side on LESS. You see way too many crappy little oversharp jpg's on the web. One trick that works well for me is to scan an 8X10 at 150 dpi, do any corrections dust spots etc, then resize one time to 75 dpi. The algorithms from 150 to 75 seem to show no loss at all from what I saw on screen and the original 150 is enough to not get kinks etc in curved lines. For just a bit of added depth, try scanning in color, then in levels, ramp up some yellow and red until you've got a semi nasty looking baby poop brown, then de-saturate 94 - 96%. The tiny bit of color left can just look like the slightest bit of warm tone.

Resizing DPI doesn't change anything at all. DPI is a scanning/print metric. For display on a monitor, it's not a relevent attribute.

Monitors (and for the sake of simplicity I'll be referring to LCD screens) map one "dot" per pixel...always. So a 900 pixel wide image at 150 dpi is exactly the same on the screen as a 900 pixel wide image at 75 dpi.

I scan at 300 DPI, so a hypothetical (mine are all actually smaller) 8x10 image is 2400x3000 pixels. I do this to start with more information in the scan. I will work curves a little if necessary to adjust what's on the screen as close as I can to the tones of the print. My scanner just isn't that great. I'll then usually rotate the image slightly to get it square. I don't have to do this with RC paper but curly fiber prints always shift a bit when I close the lid on my scanner. Then I crop the white border off of most prints.

I then resize for the web. My resize is for a max height of 600 pixels. The width follows from that dimension.

I do not sharpen at all. I used to...I don't anymore.

I use photoshop so I use the "save for the web" function and save the file at 100% quality. Sometimes this makes scan bigger than APUG's limit but usually it's just under.

Then, for my site I resize again for thumbnails. I do apply unsharp masking to my thumbnails.

Hope this helps.

 

[blaze-on]

I scan what fits on the flatbed. I shoot the others with the digital. Both are adjusted to match the print.

 

[David Nardi]

I shoot colour transparency film in 4x5 and 120. I scan the original films with an Epson 4870 flatbed scanner to get them onto my website. I paid $700 CAD new for the scanner 3 years ago. The current model is now the Epson V700 flatbed for the same price. Why don't you have a look for a used scanner on eBay?

David

David S. Nardi Photography
www.davidnardi.com

 

[Harrigan]

I scan my large bw prints up to 12x16" on my lino-hell topaz scanner. This scanner is also used for scanning critical transparencies for myself and some clients. The topaz is an awesome scanner albeit huge and slow by modern standards. Smaller less critical quality scans go on a desktop saphir II scanner.

 

[removed account4]

hi rkmeic

i use a epson 4780, i got it "refurb" through epson.
i got it because it can scan film upto 5x7" ( really 6x8 )
i have found it is easier to scan film than a prints ...
having said that, if i have a print i will try to match it

my website contains both film and print scans as
well as things i won't talk about here ...

good luck!
john

 

[rkmiec]

thanks everyone for your help.