Scanning in different sized prints

[CB_]

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.

 

[gone]

I had to downsize the resolution considerably to scan a print vs a negative. Something like way down to 200-300. This was eons ago, all I do is wet print now, but the person at the copy shop said it was an issue due to too much resolution.

 

[wiltw]

• 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.

 

[koraks]

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

The difference between 8x10 and 11x14 sized prints would not be meaningful just as a function of the difference in size, no.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

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.

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.

 

[CB_]

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.

I was comparing different prints from the same location/film stock, however I wasn't directly comparing the same images printed at different sizes next to each other, so I'm unsure if there was a bias. The question I'm trying too answer is the first sentence of the original post; 'Would there be an appreciable difference between color tonality/grain quality in prints of different sizes when digitized?'. Apologies if the post was too confusing for you to understand Alan.

 

[CB_]

• 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.

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.

 

[MattKing]

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.

 

[jtk]

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.

Monitor quality is far more important than scan quality in most cases. Monitor doesn't need to be big.

 

[CB_]

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.

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)

 

[jtk]

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)

There are several very different approaches to digital media,

In my experience with multiple somewhat complex websites, the people who can best address your question are genuine website designers and not the budget-oriented type who rely on pre-packaged approaches. If I wanted what you seem to want, I'd personally profile a few designers.

 

[grain elevator]

Most likely bottleneck is print sharpness, a small print may be sharp enough to the eye but weak when viewed enlarged.

 

[wiltw]

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.

Start with an assumption...300 dpi scan density for both 8x10 and 11x14...output is 3000 horizontal dots for 8x10 vs 4200 horizontal dots for 11 x 14.

Unless you are viewing on a 4k monitor

• 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.

Yet it has to be kept in mind the ORIGINAL FILM FORMAT...if simply printing 8x10 vs 11x14 from the same neg, there is ZERO difference in tonal gradation or detail resolution in the phots as captured on film!
...the 8x10 has 37.5% more detail per inch of print and tonal gradation per inch of print, compared to the 11 x 14
...but the original photo is simply divided up by the different magnification factors!

Yet again, the real answer is "It depends!"