Scanning: print vs negatives

[CarmenRM]

I've inherited my grandparents' photo collections and have images that are both in negative and print form.  Am I better to scan the negative or the print?  (I did do a search to see if this was answered elsewhere in the forum, but no luck.  My apologies if you've answered this before!)

I see from looking at some of the photo restoration posts that having a negative is preferred. 

But, after reading your articles on on resolution and the size of digital files, I don't understand how starting out with a much smaller negative is the better way to go, when the file size of the scan ends up being smaller than 6MP.  I think I'm missing something on the interaction between resolution and the number of megapixels an image file has?

Thank you for your time and help!

[Damien Symonds]

This all depends on what scanner you have?

[CarmenRM]

I'm planning on renting the Epson V850 Pro, if you recommend doing prints, as I have other prints that I need to scan that I don't want to send out.

If you recommend negatives, I'm thinking I'll send them to a scanning service, as I have some bizzaro sized negatives and no holders for them. I'll ask for tiff files and 48 bit scanning, but a question about the resolution -- they offer scanning at resolutions of 1200, 2400 and 3600 DPI.  The smallest negatives are about an inch square, the largest about 2x4 inches.  I know you recommend 1200PPI for items 2x3 inches and smaller.  Should I be asking for higher resolution scans?  I'm planning on making photo books, and the largest images I would do is likely 8x10.

[Damien Symonds]

The V850 can do all sizes of negatives.

So you should definitely get the scanner, and do the test yourself.  Find a few print/negative pairs, and scan both, and see which give the better results.

[CarmenRM]

Ok, sounds good.  Thank you!

[Damien Symonds]

@CarmenRM PLEASE dive into your Raw Class!  Your membership time has almost run out.