Stephen, here is an interesting take on some technical issues, Cliff
"And even with a truely good scanner, the question remains: "What is the optimal scanning resolution?". Many people just blindly choose the highest possible scanning resolution, resulting in huge files, assuming that capturing maximum detail will also mean maximum quality. " http://www.boeringa.demon.nl/menu_technic_optimalscanningresolution.htm
For commercial work, a solid relationship with a good lab is essential IMO. A small studio could buy an Imacon scanner and pro level Epson printers depending on cost-benefit. Not everyone has "gone digital" whether pro or hobbyist. Some colleges and universities here still require traditional photography in studio art courses. Exhibition prints at 20x24 or 30x40 make for interesting comparisons. Internet presentation is what it is. Cliff
These Lab. scanned images really are special. I have a number of friends on flickr shooting Mamiya and then scanning the negatives at home. I think that the cheap "Home Scanners" are really letting the side down. Not many of those images are really that good to view on screen. To really appreciate the quality of these images, you must just get one or two professionally printed really large. They will blow your socks off. Viewing Medium Format at 72 DPI does the medium no favours. Stephen
"And even with a truely good scanner, the question remains: "What is the optimal scanning resolution?". Many people just blindly choose the highest possible scanning resolution, resulting in huge files, assuming that capturing maximum detail will also mean maximum quality. "
http://www.boeringa.demon.nl/menu_technic_optimalscanningresolution.htm