Here is a related example. 

Recently, I had some work done on my Canon A1. 

As a test of the camera, I shot 1 roll of 35mm color negative film and had it developed at a local 1-hour lab.  I also got 4X6 prints and a CD.  This order was to assure me that the camera was working OK ... but also to see what kind of service I would get there.  I also wanted to find out what the scan resolution would be since I couldn't get an answer from the local shop, their corporate photo help desk, nor from their equipment manufacturer: Noritsu ... not even from a friend who is a Noritsu repair tech.

The resulting prints were kind of so-so ... flat color, almost washed out, dull, not interesting. 

When back home, I followed my normal workflow and transfered the images from the CD to my HDD.  When I reviewed those images on the monitor, they looked a lot better.  I printed them on my Canon PIXMA IP-5000 and got results that were closer to what I could see on the monitor than what the 1-hour lab did.   

Conclusion ... the Noritsu film processor and scanner worked better than the Noritsu print processor. 

Oh ... the image resolution, you ask? 1545X1024; 72dpi, bit depth 24; sRGB.  That might yield an acceptable print on 13X19 inch paper ... if you were willing to pay for that size print at onnly 72 dpi on the print.

Hmmmmmm ... maybe I should learn how to use my PF1800 film scanner.  That would give me 1800dpi (on the film) or about 4X the pixel depth of the 1-hour lab/Noritsu equipment. 

Funny world: perfection has a price ... an ever escalating price. 

--Martin