Is it better to scan negatives or prints?

Question

I've been wondering this for awhile now. Is it better to scan a 35mm negative, or a larger print from the negative? Which will provide a better scan? Does this change when moving to a larger film, like 120 or 4x5?

Answer 1

Its better to scan the original slide/negative as its better to reproduce from as close to the source as possible meaning quality of reproduction goes down in this order:

1. The source (whatever it was you actually were shooting)
2. The slide/negative or digital camera file
3. A print of the photograph.

It essentially comes down to every stage of recording introduces a level of interpretation by the medium, as you move away from the original source you're now reproducing all the interpretations those other mediums introduced.

Answer 2

That depends on the print.

Is the print just a simple print, or has processing been applied, e.g. filters to enhance contrast, burning, dodging, etc. Then I would suggest that you scan the print, if this is the version you like and want.

Otherwise, I would scan the negative.

E.g. Had I an Ansel Adams negative, and the corresponding print, I would certainly choose to scan the print.

Answer 3

Assuming that there are no technical issues with the scanners I would go with the negative. Any print will have some level of interpretation in it in terms of how colors map from negative -> print. So in effect you can do negative -> scan or negative -> print -> scan the first seems better to me.

Of course if you don't have a negative scanner using a print scanner may be "Good enough"

Answer 4

It's always better to scan the original material: the negative contains much more information than the print does. Can you capture that information? A film scanner can. My experience (5+ years ago) is that a flatbed with transparency adapter does not do anywhere near as good a job capturing detail in the negative as a film scanner can. A flatbed captures only marginally more detail from the negative than it would from a print, in fact.

But, probably the most important thing is to understand how to get a good scan. Whether you scan a negative or print, just using the automatic options will not get you the best scan you can get, and therefore is throwing away detail.

Answer 5

In theory you can get more out of a negative than a print. However, in practice you are more likely to have access to a flat bed scanner that can give a wonderful scan from the print. A good film scanner is much more expensive and slower.

Considerations are similar for larger format film. But the costs go up even more, since the consumer-level film scanners tend to handle consumer formats. A medium format or larger film scanner start getting very expensive.

So this is a case where theory says one thing, but your budget might say something else.