Actually what you said…
Perhaps I misunderstood, since it was in the context of 1080 max resolution of the BMD scanner. There is plenty of information on the subject that indeed, working above 1080 (including your own reference to 1200) is best.
This is a recurring subject, perhaps I should have referenced the prior post on the subject
Roland, no need to come to an agreement on the subject of resolution or grain. Everyone will use what is best for their particulars. And while I do not share the same perspective on the subject, I respect that is your preference.
Nevertheless, for the benefit of others, it is best to differentiate between personal preferences (which everyone is entitled to have their own), and best practices.
My stated mission adopted from @friolator
It maybe obvious, but if the final product target resolution of 8mm is intended to be 1080, and ANY post processing is part of the workflow (Cropping the most basic), it will be best for the scanning resolution to be higher than 1080. How much more?
Whatever you can afford (sensor and storage).
My summary devil’s advocate.
- Would you like less grain: Select illuminant appropriately, scan at higher resolution than intended target, digitally adjust the amount of grain to your satisfaction (I used NeatVideo to do so).
- Would you like more grain: Select illuminant appropriately, scan at higher resolution than intended target, digitally adjust detail and sharpness to your satisfaction (Davinci Resolve for example).
Thank you @friolator @cpixip for the references. Great material.
In the context of the posting (8mm Cintel Scanner) regardless if one likes more grain, or less grain, 1080 -in my opinion- is not enough for a $30K commercial scanner. Message to BMD: too little, too late.