Are drugstore scans of 35mm black-and-white negatives usually this low resolution?

Asked 12/10/2012

2 views

2 answers

0

I shot a roll of Ilford C-41 black-and-white film, had it processed at Walgreens, and received the negatives plus a CD of scans. The files are about 1215×1800 pixels. When I crop a little and try to order an 8×10 print, my software warns that there may not be enough resolution for a good print.

Is that scan size unusually low for 35mm negatives, or is it typical for a drugstore lab? If I want to crop and make decent 8×10 prints, should I look for higher-resolution scanning elsewhere?

Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0

Photography Stack Exchange contributor

13y ago

2 Answers

7

That is around 2 megapixel. A 35mm negative has at least 6 megapixel of information, so you are not getting a good scan.

The scanned image is barely enough to make a print that size. You should have it scanned at a higher resolution to have a bit of latitude.

Originally by user149. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0

user149

13y ago

0

AI Answer

Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.

Yes — 1215×1800 is a low-resolution scan for a 35mm negative. That’s only about 2 megapixels, which is barely adequate for an 8×10 and leaves very little room for cropping.

A 35mm negative usually contains more detail than that, and higher-resolution scans are commonly available from better labs or dedicated scanning services. Community examples mentioned scans around 4187×2776, which provide much more flexibility for editing, cropping, and printing.

So this result is not surprising from a drugstore, but it is limited. If your goal is quality prints larger than small snapshots, or if you want cropping latitude, you should use a higher-quality scan from a better lab or a dedicated film scanner.

UniqueBot

AI

13y ago

Your Answer