How much do I need a consistent image size ?

[swmcl]

Hi,

I have a number of sheet film negatives of a particular series that I wish to scan and digitally print.  All the negs are a little different size wise and the image on them is not ever in the same place twice because the film slides around in the film holder a little.  So that means the borders are slightly different on each sheet.

When I scan it is also difficult to get the alignment perfectly vertical at 4000ppi !  I can get pretty close though.

The first question is, "Do I need to present a professional lab a disk of images of exactly the same size ?" (assuming I want identically sized prints)

Second question, "Should I be more concerned to present a lab with images with the same aspect ratio ?" (assuming I want identically sized prints)

I should say that my method at present is to make a high grade scan of the negs to intentionally include all four edges.  There is one border in particular where I have filed a series of notches in the film holder so that I can identify the film coming from the holder.  All holders are individually identifiable.  The other reason to scan including all four edges is because, once cropped, I see the cropped image as being a derivation or interpretation of the original.  The high-res scan at the start is my baseline.

The files produced are at least 18000 x 21000 pixels for 4x5 and 21000 x 29000 for 5x7.  The file size for 4x5 is 2.25G or so.  For 5x7 I recall something like 4G.  The file size matters because the software that you recommend needs to handle these sizes.

I would appreciate the thoughts of this community.

Cheers,

Steve

[elliot_n]

If you want identically sized prints, you should give the lab identically sized files - same pixel dimensions, same aspect ratio.

It's not clear what your problem is.

[BobShaw]

I'm afraid I'm a bit lost too.
I would expect that however you scanned them you would then put them through an editing programme and align and crop them and then export a file as required.

In days past a print had to show the edge of a negative but these days not often.

[swmcl]

OK.  A problem is that I am having difficulty cutting out a section of the obviously massive file to be exactly the same as the next.  The crop action in Photoshop is referenced to the top left corner of the original image.  No point doing an action to crop the images as they all need to start (or be referenced to) a different point.  I think Elements can't handle the file size.

What I need - if I were to get identical images - would be like a cookie cutter that I could wave above the original till I was happy and then cut out the image.

However, if the printing software does extrapolation / interpolation than maybe I don't need to worry so much about having identical files.

Such are the vagaries of a life with size variables unlike a digital capture of a known size every time !

Rgds,

[pegelli]

In photoshop you can specify the pixel dimensions of the crop.
By doing that you will get exactly the same crop size/aspect ratio and the crops will be upsampled/downsampled to the set values.
Can't you do that in elements as well?

[swmcl]

Yes I can specify the image / crop size in pixels.  But it isn't the same as waving a transparent cookie cutter above the image is it ?  How would I do it ?  Click somewhere in the image to set the reference point and then cut from there ?  How do I know if I clicked in the right spot until afterwards when I say, "Gee it would be a bit better a little to the right ..."

Perhaps I should just print the whole thing and then when it is framed would I cover over the edges.. ?

This way I could sell the print and the actual negative together as one because the print would include (under the matting) the identifying hand-filed notches.  Thus my art has complete continuity.

Selling the print with the negative as a unique piece of art would increase the sale price markedly wouldn't it ?

[hugowolf]

I think you are making this way too complicated. You can set the crop aspect ratio to whatever you want in Ps, then move the image to suit the ratio. You can even use the up/down left/right arrow key to nudge the image in very small increments. A crop doesn't have to start at the top right corner.

Brian A

[pegelli]

Yes I can specify the image / crop size in pixels.  But it isn't the same as waving a transparent cookie cutter above the image is it ?  How would I do it ?  Click somewhere in the image to set the reference point and then cut from there ?  How do I know if I clicked in the right spot until afterwards when I say, "Gee it would be a bit better a little to the right ..."

After you have set the crop area a first time you can still move it around and enlarge or tighten it to get the exact crop you want.

[elliot_n]

Yes I can specify the image / crop size in pixels.  But it isn't the same as waving a transparent cookie cutter above the image is it ?

It's still not clear what you're trying to do. Maybe you could post a low res image to explain your dilemma?

Re the cookie cutter - if you're trying to remove the same number of pixels from each scan, you might be better off using the rectangular marquee tool rather than the crop tool. Choose 'Fixed Size' and specify the pixel dimensions.

Re. selling negs. It's unusual, but not unheard of. It only makes sense if you're selling the neg with an analog print. Then it adds to the sense of rarity. As soon as you've scanned the neg, and start making digital prints, the neg loses interest.

[BradSmith]

Selling the print with the negative as a unique piece of art would increase the sale price markedly wouldn't it ?

I think that the only people that are much interested in "rarity" are fine art collectors.  Expensive fine art collectors.  If you aren't already selling into that world, I doubt that anyone else will care very much that you're gluing the negative to the back of the mount.  Additionally, it seems to me to be a contrivance at being very "arty".  It generates the same feeling I have when I see a 5"x7" print in a 30"x40" mat on a gallery wall.      "Look at me!!!!   Look at me!!!!!   I'm VERY SPECIAL!!!!!"    rings in my ears.
Brad