Would a professional restorer be able to do a better job restoring a print if he were to scan the print at 2400 ppi vs 1200 ppi?

Question

According to one answer on this question at Genealogy and Family History, a restorer of prints will often ask a customer to scan a print for restoration at the customer's scanner's highest resolution, usually 1200 ppi or 2400 ppi.
However, my scanner has a maximum optical resolution of 1200 ppi.
The question I have is, if I came upon a print showing signs of age/damage, is it even worth it to invest in a scanner that scan at a higher resolution than my current scanner, so that I could scan at 2400 ppi?
Would a professional restorer be able to produce a better print had I decided to scan the old/damaged print at 2400 ppi vs 1200 ppi? My inclination is to say yes, but I realize that there are diminishing returns when scanning at higher resolutions, after a certain point.
I'm mainly talking about analog family photographs and portraits, rather than scanning 8mm film/slides, which would require specialized scanners.

xiota · Answer

There will be minimal benefit from scanning prints at 2400dpi, as opposed to 1200dpi. Most prints do not benefit from being scanned at resolutions higher than about 200-300 dpi. Reasons to use higher resolutions include being able to make enlargements.
There is more to scan quality than resolution, like color depth, noise, and dynamic range. However, these properties are often limited by the original when scanning prints.
You should attempt to scan the negatives, if you have access to them.  You would need a scanner capable of scanning film at higher resolutions than your current scanner is capable of.  (See Maximum useful resolution for scanning 35mm film)

Would a professional restorer be able to do a better job restoring a print if he were to scan the print at 2400 ppi vs 1200 ppi?

One Answer

Add your own answers!

Ask a Question