I Don't!!!
I Don't!!!
Hi all,
I am a recent re-convert to film photography and rangefinder cameras.
I bought a Plustek 8200i with Silverfast SE software and I am desperately trying to find the ideal settings for scanning high quality B/W negs. (Trying B&W first as I really prefer it.... I leave color to my X100.... for the moment)
What I'm trying to achieve:
I want to be able to get a reasonable quality scan and to be able to print 4x6" standards and occasionally some 10x15" pictures or slightly bigger for framing (of course viewed from further away, so no first grade quality needed).
What are the best settings to use?? Uo to now I get only mediocre results and I'm getting tired tweaking the scanner settings..
Please tell me someone can help me take this hurdle.
After trying for some time to use scanners, I quit.
First, I fought with the OEM software... Epson
Then, I fought with Vuescan
Then, I fought with Silverfast SE
Hated them all, but ended up using OEM just to get the best scan and no image processing at the point of scan.
Then I bought better holders (BetterScanning)
Came to the conclusion that do in ANY image processing with the scanner software was hopeless, and opted later Post Processing in software designed specifically for image editing. The scanner is not a good image processor and necessarily neither is scanning software. A scanner should be used simply to get a good image into a usable digital format.... not preclude or degrade further image editing in good editing software.
For instance, sharpen in the scanner software, and you may be limiting "sharpening" in Photoshop, etc. It's far too early in the process to sharpen at the scan level.
It's incredibly time consuming just to get the best image one can without trying to process in scanner software, but I decided to just get the best basic scans with the Epson OEM SW,
Ultimately, if I could get good 35 scans (which I rarely shoot any more) I couldn't get good MF. If I achieved good results on one, the techniques for the other were different.
Final result... Scanner GONE!. I have my images scanned when the film is processed (Oh Yeah-I don't process my own film- no darkroom and I don't want to do it anyway).
I don't always have full rolls of MF scanned HD, but may choose select negs/transparencies.
I tried 4 scanners off and on over the last ten years. Results always the same. (but I admit... all were flatbed and not the cheapest) And since MF is more important to me dedicated MF scanners were always too expensive.
Good luck.
The bottom line I have seen over and over... You will spend a disproportionate amount of time seeking good scanning on flatbed scanners. Film processers have skilled people who do nothing but. And that's if you get good references for a good processor.
I prefer to spend my time shooting images. And I do weigh more to the film side in my shooting.
I leave it to others to rebutt my findings, but none of them will convince me that my time and effort is well spent on scanning images to digital format.
I make $80 per hour working on computers and I can find plenty of that kind of work, which I actually enjoy. I cannot afford to pay myself $80 per hour to do photo scanning, and be frustrated in the process. I do nothing without considering time value.