For those of you that are getting cheap scans...

[Ken Ford]

.. what resolutions are you getting?

I've recently tried two local minilabs for XP2 Super processing only and scans (no prints):

Costco - 2048 x 3088, but indifferent processing (this was their high res offering)
Target - 1037 x 1565, decent processing (no high res available)

I'm going to keep looking.

[VinceC]

I get 1.5 meg files (1000 x 1500) from a pharmacy and the grocery store. I use them because they're cheap. The CVS pharmacy uses very good Kokak processing with a two-day turnaround. The grocery store uses indifferent processing but is a lot cheaper. I've been doing the grocery story route and tweaking in PhotoShop.

[Damian]

I had my film developed and scanned at Target once. The scans were rotten. Blurry, streaky, BAD. I even took them back and had them do it again. The results really weren't any better. Here's (http://www.scisquared.net/private/cascade/images/medium_006_6.jpg) an example. That photo is actually very sharp, saturated and contrasty. YMMV of course. I gave up spending money on scans and just do it at home.

[chenick]

Labs with Fuji Frontier machines can be very good, normal res in any of the Fuji labs I use is 1840 x 1232 (2.3 megapixel), but they also do hi-res of 3360 x 2240 pixels which is 7.5 megapixels.
My local lab is Agfa, so I get often get their hires scans which are 3.8 megapixles 2400 x 1600)
I prefer the Fujis.
I have used Kodak machines before, no complaints apart from the rather low res 1544x1024.

Nick

[CraigK]

A local lab here has a Konica machine that will do MF as well as 35 mm. They can crank the scanner up to deliver a whopping 100 mb file from 35mm. The scans from 6x7 negs and trans are very, very nice.

[ch1]

This kind of thread seems to pop up about every six weeks or so.

I shoot film and scan into RAW (or TIFF) winding up with 65mb or so files. Anything in JPEG is already interpolated down to a lower quality image from that. Particularly if you go down to around 1.5mb.

To me this brings up a more interesting question.

Besides the immediate LCD image, the other advantage cited by digi shooters is faster workflow compare to developing and scanning film.

But to the Joe Average shooter - is there really any advantage to taking a JPEG digishot and then having it printed (either at a self-serve kiosk or by the photo store)? He winds up with a mediocre print at best and a CD full of mediocre images.

Since today I saw a tourist happily taking a picture of the a famous NYC skyscraper with here digicam - perhaps pciture quality matters less to casual shooters now than it ever did before?

[Ken Ford]

Nick - great info about the various machines. Thanks!

George - I was asking out of curiosity since I don't currently have a film scanner. I'm beginning to think I should just invest in one and get it over with. My problem is that I shoot Minox through 4x5, and would prefer a scanner that can handle it all. (Maybe not the Minox - I should sell the little gem.)

[keithslater]

Its kinda funny this thread popped up. I get my film developed and scanned at Wal-mart. This evening I was asking the girl what they scan at, she swore 4mp. I told here I seem to be getting between 1.2 and 1.6mp off their cd's. She said she was not sure, but it had to be 4mp. I just checked the cd, I find 3 files with the same pics in them, they are all around 1.3mp.

[w3rk5]

At ShoppersDrugMart they scan it at 1544x1024.

[raid]

I get higher resulution with Ritz Camera. They claim that all scans are at 6MP, but I only see 2 MP. No clue where the problem is.

[Doug]

My local lab's Pro service scans 35mm at 2000x2992 pixels on Agfa machinery. Oddly, the bigger the neg, the lower the res: 2000x2696 from 645 and 2000x2504 from 6x7...

[tedwhite]

I gave up on scans from Walmart, Target, etc., and bought a 35mm film scanner. I send all my C41 color film to PhotoWorks in Seattle. As that's all they do, the negs are processed well and the prints are perfectly OK. I use the prints to decide which neg I'm going to stick into the film scanner. As for Black and White film, I develop it at home, then scan the negs to see which one (if any) is worth printing.

[Trius]

A nearby drugstore I've used gave me 1544x1024 JPG, and the results from the C41 B&W here (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=25561&cat=5689) were quite nice. But they got a new scanning setup recently and I was disappointed. I'm going to give them one more try and see if it was a fluke.