Film Noob here >the general threads are useless edition How

>>2949776
>>the general threads are useless edition
Direct me to your post in the general and I'll score your original question out of 10 before helping you. I'm willing to bet it was a vague as fuck question.

The truth is that it depends entirely on what you're looking to do with your scans. Are you intending to print them, print them big? Just for web viewing? What size do you need for web if so. Do you have a digital camera, what's your budget for a flatbed etc etc.

>What file type could I expect to receive? AND What sort of flexibility would the file have in pst/ (again in comparisn to a digital raw file)
Depends entirely on how you scan senpai. Can't really give you an answer until it's known what you're looking to do and how you're going to be scanning.

Thnaks for reading my post.

File: fogcropsmall.jpg (212KB, 750x750px) Image search: [Google]

212KB, 750x750px

>>2949776
that really depends
here is one of my scans, after being cropped it can still print a native 24x24" 300dpi print, original file would have been 28x28" at 300dpi.

Hasselblad 500c/m 80mm 2.8 Planar T*
Fuji 160s
Nikon Coolscan 8000ed

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Nikon
Camera Model	Nikon SUPER COOLSCAN 8000 ED
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS4 Macintosh
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2016:10:20 11:27:46
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	750
Image Height	750

File: fogsample.jpg (251KB, 1201x896px) Image search: [Google]

251KB, 1201x896px

>>2950143
crop at 100%

Scans out of the coolscan can be Jpg, Tiff, or NEF.
Bit depth can also be selected depending on the scanner. Drum Scans are god but the CCD scanners can often do a pretty good job, and flat beds are good enough for some people, it depends on how much you want to spend.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Nikon
Camera Model	Nikon SUPER COOLSCAN 8000 ED
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS4 Macintosh
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	4000 dpi
Vertical Resolution	4000 dpi
Image Created	2016:10:20 11:33:47
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1201
Image Height	896

>>2949776
>By that I mean, what would the quality and reslution be nce it is a digital file?
Varies obviously depending on what you get with the effective resolution after you wrangled your shot (or shots, you can tile) through a lens onto a sensor.

Scanning with a higher-end DSLR/MILC can be advisable for a lot of "scans", they're usually doing it faster and better than actual scanners.

> I would like to shoot some MF film and then have it scanned.. What sort of quality and resolution could I expect in comparison to my digital RAWS?
Oh, as a service? Well, that depends on who is scanning it. Are they gonna use some shitty canoscan hackjob, or a Reflecta, or a Hasselblad / wet mount drum scanner? Or are they doing MILC/DSLR scans?

Only the Hasselblad / drum scan / good MILC or DSLR scans will give you actually really good resolution and quality, but having that done as a service will cost you quite a lot, and DIY or simply shooting with a digital camera from the start should quickly be interesting.

> What file type could I expect to receive?
TIFF might be the most common type of file.

>>2950828
>Only the Hasselblad / drum scan / good MILC or DSLR scans will give you actually really good resolution and quality,

Meh
NIkon scanners are every bit as good as the Imicon (hasselblad) scanners, and some of the Minolta scanners will give them a pretty good run for the money.

SLR scanning can be better than flatbeds and with enough time and money get close to (sometimes surpass) dedicated scanners. But to get there it is less work and more cost effective to buy a scanner or get someone to scan your shit.