Re: Printing anaglyph 3D

[T3D John Ohrt <johrt@xxxxxxx>]

I should have mentioned scanning prints.  Aside from real quality
transparencies, prints have less dynamic range than the original
negative, and because the media is much grainier and than the negative,
the print media will limit the resolution of fine detail at lower
magnifications.  Just how much you can enlarge the negative depends on
the resolution of the negative.  Off the cuff, if a 4x6 looks really
crisp, then a 8x10 is probably the limit for lower end 35 mm lens and
normal film resolution.  This is very crude.  But if true in a
particular case, a 300 pixel per inch scan of an 8x10 is going to get
the information.  With more costly media (opaque), 400 pixels per inch
and even somewhat higher can still extract more detail.  I think you've
maxed out on opaque media at 600  or so.

Don't let my comments deter you.  If you scan an 8x10 print at 300 dpi,
it is the equivalent of scanning a 35 mm negative at 2400 dpi.  True the
negative scan will be clearer etc, but you can still do a lot of work
with a flatbed at 300 dpi, especially if you plan to print the results
on a "photo-realistic" inkjet, because the printer has much lower
dynamic range and less resolution than the scan, and I mean any any
inkjet on the market regardless of cost.  You'll only notice the
difference on monitors and quality hardcopy devices.


The big plus of flatbeds, is that they are cheap, many supported by
quality 3rd party software and drivers for most operating systems.  Of
course, they also have many other uses than scanning for anaglyph 3-d
and we will stop here.

Regards 
--
John Ohrt,  Regina, SK, Canada
johrt@xxxxxxx



------------------------------