Plustek 7600i SE Test...I like it!

[sanmich]

David

I had the 3200, then the 4990, and my father had the 4870.
The old 3200 was good.
After some (quite a lot) of experimentation, including a top unit replacement , I have reached the conclusion that these model suffer from a serious focus issue. On both the 4990 and 4870 samples I tested, the focus was clearly better on some areas than on others, meaning that depending on where you place the neg, you get a sharp image or you don't.
BTW, I also have tested my Nikon 5000, and getting focused images is not trivial either, but at least you can choos the focus area, and the dedicated holder helps a lot.
Good luck with your new scanner!

3. Nearly every scan on the Plustek 7600i has a black vertical line that runs from the very top of the scan to the very bottom.

I think you have a dead pixel. You should send your machine for waranty repair.

 

[mdruziak]

Egor, if you are still having a problem with the black line, drop me an email markdruziak @ plustek.com with no spaces.

 

[damien.murphy]

Damien:

I eventually gave up on both VueScan and SE, and updated to Ai.

Ed and I exchanged a few emails, and his response was basically "if you want to scan negatives you should buy a Coolscan 9000." I suppose I can understand his lack of interest, since Plustek had already chosen to work with Silverfast. Note that I still use Vuescan with my Epson flatbed, just not with the Plustek.

Ultimately, after scanning the same few negatives about 1,000 times in multiple applications and with multiple different scan settings, I drew a few "conclusions." It's my opinion that the Plustek scanner may not be as linear as other scanners, meaning the scanning software needs to be 'tweaked' in order to get the best performance. Silverfast has done this custom 'tweaking,' while Vuescan has not. This is why highlights sometimes blow out in Vuescan no matter what you do, while Silverfast can massage the dynamic range into something scannable in a single pass.

Using Silverfast Ai, I'm able to extract full dynamic range from a B&W negative and get a nice 16-bit grayscale scan to chew on in Photoshop. The SE version only outputs 8-bit grayscale scans (unless you choose to purchase additional Silverfast software to read a special HD file).

I tried to save a few bucks by purchasing the SE version and using the Plustek with VueScan, but I would not recommend this path to others. The Plustek really only achieves its full potential when married to SilverFast Studio Ai -- even for B&W photographers like us.

Gregory,

Appreciate the feedback. Thoughts of film scanners gave way to other things over Christmas and the new year, but am back in the market now though, and your advice I find quite valuable.

It seems that none of the scanner options these days are without their caveats - it's a real pity Nikon departed the affordable scanner segment!

It seems Silverfast AI is the way to go, not least of which has been influenced by an emerging need to scan colour negatives in addition to my b&w negatives.

It is a pity re: Vuescan, I was hoping to be able to avoid learning another badly interfaced piece of scanning software

 

[v3cron]

I'm debating whether or not to get this scanner, and I'm a little concerned about noise. I owned a Nikon 9000 for a few years until it died, and have been using a rental Imacon ever since. The Nikon was pretty noisy, actually. Any shadows not printed to black, or thin negs would show a splattering of green flecks everywhere, even with 16x multisampling. From the samples in this thread, it looks like there may be a big noise problem here. Has anyone played around with thin negs and gotten good results? I don't mind grain at all, but noise is not ok. Thanks.

 

[v3cron]

Roberto, here's another color scan...Fujicolor Pro160S from the Plustek 7600ai SE with SilverFast SE:

Was this scanned with multisampling? The shadows, like in the upper left, are really noisy. Is the original scan like that, or is some of this from compression? I'm really thinking about buying this scanner, but this looks problematic.

If you're bored and want to post a 100% of that corner, I would be really happy.

 

[v3cron]

Damien:

I eventually gave up on both VueScan and SE, and updated to Ai.

Ed and I exchanged a few emails, and his response was basically "if you want to scan negatives you should buy a Coolscan 9000." I suppose I can understand his lack of interest, since Plustek had already chosen to work with Silverfast. Note that I still use Vuescan with my Epson flatbed, just not with the Plustek.

Ultimately, after scanning the same few negatives about 1,000 times in multiple applications and with multiple different scan settings, I drew a few "conclusions." It's my opinion that the Plustek scanner may not be as linear as other scanners, meaning the scanning software needs to be 'tweaked' in order to get the best performance. Silverfast has done this custom 'tweaking,' while Vuescan has not. This is why highlights sometimes blow out in Vuescan no matter what you do, while Silverfast can massage the dynamic range into something scannable in a single pass.

Using Silverfast Ai, I'm able to extract full dynamic range from a B&W negative and get a nice 16-bit grayscale scan to chew on in Photoshop. The SE version only outputs 8-bit grayscale scans (unless you choose to purchase additional Silverfast software to read a special HD file).

I tried to save a few bucks by purchasing the SE version and using the Plustek with VueScan, but I would not recommend this path to others. The Plustek really only achieves its full potential when married to SilverFast Studio Ai -- even for B&W photographers like us.

I have been using the SE version since I got the scanner yesterday, and am able to open to HDR files in Photoshop without anything special. The scanner profile is embedded in the tiff, so all I have to do is tell Photoshop to convert to my working space. Everything looks good after that. I tried the SF HDR demo, and it was quite a bit harder to use than just opening in PS.

The one thing I do wish SE could do though, is to scan with both mutlisampling and multiexposure at the same time. This is a terribly noisy scanner on color negs, and really needs all the noise cancellation it can get.

 

[PCStudio]

***great pictures Congrats !
..........I am not sure about Plustek 7600 REAL resolution spi / non interpolated/

but Vuescan has limited sharpening options . Test scan 1. / with NO sharp very blurry , 2./ Scan with grain reduser -just sofware mistake
3./ 48 bit scan with Sharp ' YES' has low sharpening and CCD sensor misreading

Original scanner software has more editing options and results are much better.

 

[PatrickT]

Hey David...would you mind telling us what your typical scan settings are? DPI, sharpening, adjustments, etc. It'd help a lot!

 

[David_Manning]

Hey Patrick, wow...so many variables. Color or b&w, online viewing or printing, etc.

For everything I've shared online here, I scan using the Tri-x setting in Silverfast SE and scan at 2400dpi. I use "use less sharpening," which is less sharpening than the default auto-sharpen, but more than an un-sharpened scan.

I import scans into Photoshop and resize, 1800 pixels on the longest side. Even though screen resolution is generally 72dpi, I double it and resize to 150dpi (so I can enlarge images on my iPad). Tone/levels, and voilà.

Not super detailed, I know, but that's generally what I do for online viewing.

 

[PatrickT]

David...thanks, much appreciated. I know there are a ton of variables, but I figured I'd ask. Everyone has their own way of doing it, but the photos you post consistently look great.

I just got my 7600i in the mail and have to say that I'm super impressed. I only have a slide holder for now and my very first scan from it came out fantastic. Very detailed, colors are great, etc. I'm glad your photos pushed me over the edge to get one.

I'm coming from an Epson V500...and while it's fantastic for medium format, I always found it lacking for 35mm.

So here's to the 7600i

My very first scans with the 7600i....Hexar AF, Velvia 100:

 

[David_Manning]

Patrick,

Looks terrific. Glad your first impression is positive with the Plustek. For the money, it's the best for 35mm in my opinion.

Take care...looking forward to more examples.

----David.

 

[lewis44]

I have to say that I think Velvia is the best film if you are going to scan it. I've had outstanding results. Velvia 50 is probably the best of the best, but I shoot mostly Velvia 100

Santa Cruz Harbor, California:

 

[Stuart John]

Does anyone have identical scans from a plustek and a V500. I have the V500 at the moment and it is fine for small prints and web uploads from 35mm but I am considering shooting more film and probably dropping my digital gear completely for a few years. I'm just wondering about maybe a better scanner or just doing B&W darkroom again. Not too sure yet.
This is what I am getting from the v500 at the moment..

This was a 2000ppi scan from the v500.

 

[lilneige]

anyone had experience scanning colour negative with this scanner & SilverFast?
I am not sure sure should I use NigaFix or scan it as positive than invert the results.

I found sometimes scanning the negative and inverting the scan can produce much more shadow detail. However, sometimes after adjusted the level, the blue cast is still presented and too difficult to remove. On the other hand, NigaFix is more consistent in colour balance, but the shadow detail is noticeably worse.

and anyone found that multiscan would produce a colour shift for the final scan result?

 

[Jim Evidon]

I have an Epson 4990. I could never get the Silverfast SE that it came with working right so I used the Epson software with lousy results.

Recently, before deciding to buy a new scanner such as the Plustek, I downloaded a trial version of the Silverfast Ai. I found it very complicated and I couldn't get it to work very well. So, based on this forum's prior comments I downloaded Vuescan and found that at last I get decent transparency and negative scans; color and B&W. Admittedly, sharpness could be better when I scanned at 1200 and even 2400 dpi and 24bit color.

However, when I scanned at 4800 and 48 bit color and cut out the color artifacts in CS5, the results were amazingly sharp and full of detail and seemed to have good tonal range. The output was TIFF DNG so the scanned frame opened in Adobe Camera Raw. Admittedly, the scans took a while, but the results were worth it.

So here is my question: Why scan at 16 bit grayscale when 48 bit is available and cutting out the color artifacts in Photoshop is easy to do?
As a relatively newbie to scanning, I'd really like to know.

 

[David_Manning]

I honestly never had an issue with the supplied Epson software on my 4990 for colors or b&w, whether slides or negatives. My big boogie man was sharpness...scans were never sharp-enough, and aggressive PP sharpening just introduced halos. After that problem, the next was just overall speed of operation.

I am satisfied with both of those issues with my Plustek. The only problem I'm left with is getting consistent color from the same roll of negatives.

 

[Jim Evidon]

The Epson software works very well. It was the added supplied Silverfast SE that came with the scanner that gave me problems. I agree that the results are soft, but the Epson 4990 scans with the Vuescan @ 4800 dpi, 48 bit color gives a much sharper result, though probably not as good as the Plustek, which I haven't had the opportunity to try.

 

[Jim Evidon]

Re.: Plustek multiple passes:

I went to the Plustek website and the brochure for download is in German. Nevertheless, I was able to read that it is specifically single pass scan and not multiple.

 

[Stuart John]

David is it possible that you have any images that were scanned with both the Plustek and the Epson.

 

[Jim Evidon]

I'm still asking:
Why scan at 16 bit grayscale when 48 bit is available and cutting out the color artifacts in Photoshop is easy to do?
As a relatively newbie to scanning, I'd really like to know.