Scanning in different sized prints

• The fundament grain size on the smaller print is a fraction of the grain size of the larger print, because of the higher degree of magnification to make the larger print...the grains are magnified so they are more apparent to the eye when viewing the larger print.
• If both prints were simply enlargements of the same subject, on a 4x print vs. on a 12x print, the subject of the photo has 3 times more print (in each direction) so the apparent tonality should be better on the larger scan than on the smaller scan.
• Lastly, If you think of both prints in terms of dots per inch of print, a scan of both prints have the same resolution. But the smaller print has more detail resolution per inch than the larger print...a 4x print has 3 times the detail resolution (per print inch) than the 12x print. ...if both images started with the same lens resolution (e.g. 84 line-pairs/millimeter of film). However, depending upon the scan density (scanner dpi), that greatly determines if some detail is lost during the scanning process due to insufficiently dense scan setting.

Chandler said:

Would there be an appreciable difference between color tonality/grain quality in prints of different sizes when digitized?

Click to expand...

Chandler said:

Would there be an appreciable difference between color tonality/grain quality in prints of different sizes when digitized? I was recently going over and comparing prints from the same project, some made a couple of years ago on 11x14, and some made more recently on 8x10 (Endura). Perhaps it was the scanners (epson 10000xl and v600 respectively), but on my monitor the 11x14 prints seemed to have much smoother tonal gradients and more pleasing color, however I was unable to make any direct comparisons to see for sure.

Click to expand...

Alan Edward Klein said:

What do you mean that you were "...unable to make direct comparisons?" It seems you did compare the results. and found the 11x14 prints were better. Please clarify what you did and what you want to accomplish.

Click to expand...

wiltw said:

• If both prints were simply enlargements of the same subject, on a 4x print vs. on a 12x print, the subject of the photo has 3 times more print (in each direction) so the apparent tonality should be better on the larger scan than on the smaller scan.

Click to expand...

MattKing said:

When you are viewing the results on your monitor, how much magnification are you using?
If you are simply filling the screen with the print, scan quality is playing a role.

Click to expand...

MattKing said:

When you are viewing the results on your monitor, how much magnification are you using?
If you are simply filling the screen with the print, scan quality is playing a role.

Click to expand...

Chandler said:

I'm just viewing them unmagnified, filling the screen. But I'm considering the visual differences while sharing through different digital media (IG, forums, web portfolio)

Click to expand...

Chandler said:

Definitely. I'm wondering if you'd be able to notice this on the monitor, like if you were comparing a 120 frame to a 35mm frame.

Click to expand...

• on my monitor with 2560 x 1440 pixels on 27" monitor, I have to view the images at 85% or 60% view, respectively. So in that case the computer 'throws away' 15% and 40% of the pixels, to fit both images across the 2560 horizontal resolution...IOW I am reduced to the monitor as the lowest common denominator which equalizes the two images...I have crippled the scan from 11x14 to a greater degree!
• IF I was viewing both images at 100%, I see a smaller fraction of the 11 x 14 image, but I can fully appreciate any tonal gradient advantage it would have over the 8x10 scan.