Scanner query

[ashfaque]

I have one those basic All-in-One printer/scanner (Dell). Just out of curiousity, is it possible to use that to scan negative?

I'm a complete novice, so please give me as much/detailed basic (& advanced) information as possible, for e.g., softwares, film-holder etc., I'd need.

Cheers

 

[NaChase]

It probably won't be very useful in terms of scanning negatives unless it has a means of illuminating the film from above, as is the case with most flat bed film scanners. You can scan it on a normal flatbed and then crop and invert the image but you are likely to find it both time consuming and lacking in quality. I would recommend a basic, albeit excellent, beginners level film scanner such as the Epson V300. It costs less than $100 and produces excellent scans for the price.

 

[tlitody]

I doubt it. these units are usually document scanners not film scanners. film scanners require the film to be between the light source and the scan sensor. document scanners rely on reflection not transmission and the light source is on the same side as the sensor.
But I might be wrong. depends on you particular unit.

 

[VF101]

Few days ago, I've done some tests with my Canon office scanner and the results were really bad. So I bought a new Epson V330 Photo scanner for less than 100 Euros. I really love it! I've even learned that my negatives from 20 years ago weren't that bad - it's been the paper prints that are so awful.

Attached you'll find a scan (scaled and sharpened) from today and an 100% crop (out of the scanner). The negative ist 12 years old, it's an Ilford HP5 Plus, shot with a simple P&S Olympus AF-10 Super.

 

[ashfaque]

Thanks a lot everyone.

I was wondering if you can please kindly explain the large variation in prices of Epson's scanners. In terms of keeping as much details as possible* [including scratches and everything], what are the main features should I be looking for in choosing a film scanner?

@Nick: Can you please let me know the size of each 35mm scan at the maximum quality from a Epson V300?

Cheers 🙂


[*] I intentionally don't want to use the term 'optimal' since it's quite relative.

 

[Lilserenity]

I can categorically say that any flatbed not designed to scan film will be awful unless you are pleased with lo-fidelity results, in which case I would question why spend all the money on the film and development, and why not use a mobile phone instead and take your memory card to Boots to get little 6x4s.

Most Epson scanners of the past 5-6 years are 'good enough', I cannot comment on the V300 but I have a Perfection 4870 which is about 2-3 generations behind (succeeded by the 4490 and then V700, the alternative line is the pro version of the 4870 which basically included some colour targets and Silverfast, succeeded by the 4990 and then V750.)

I can highly recommend the 4870 at least with 120, it's not a dedicated scanner but it's good enough to print large images from its scans (24x24" being excellent.) I cannot comment on its 35mm capabilities but the 4490 which a friend has, turns out excellent scans of Portra and HP5+, and there are in reality few meaningful differences between the 4870 and 4490, as I always scan at no more than 2400dpi.

So you may find a second hand scanner is perfectly decent. The 4870 I have which came complete cost me £70 a year ago and arguably will be just as good as most of the Epson offerings today (with the exception of the V700 and V750 which I am sure are a little more of an improvement.)

Vicky

 

[ashfaque]

Thanks Vicky. You have a nice website with wonderful images, btw. 🙂