Any news on the new Plustek 120 scanner?

mdruziak said:
Mark from Plustek here. Here is a brief update...

Yesterday I saw some scans of USAF 1951 test targets that were done with a pre-production OpticFilm 120 and Lasersoft 8. The results were impressive. If you compare them to the USAF 1951 targets on filmscanner.info for the 9000 and the Flextight X1, the OpticFilm 120 is closer to the Flextight X1 than the 9000.

If anyone has any scanned images of USAF 1951 targets made with either the X1 or 9000, please drop me a note: markdruziak@plustek.com I'd like to take a look at another set of scanned targets if possible.

There is much more to image quality than the results from a test target, but things are going in the right direction as far as resolution goes.
Click to expand...

Mark, thanks for checking in. Can you give us any
information as to the area of the 120 film that will be
available for scanning with the machine? Will it extend
out into the film rebates?
 
>>The results were impressive. If you compare them to the USAF 1951 targets on filmscanner.info for the 9000 and the Flextight X1, the OpticFilm 120 is closer to the Flextight X1 than the 9000.<<

With some searching, you can find multiple references on the internet for the issue that the Flextight hardware/software combination does default behind the scenes sharpening. If I remember right, people who tested claimed you need to turn the sharpening down to -120 or -140 to see the true unmanipulated optical resolution of the scanner. That makes the 9000 all that more impressive.

Doug
 
mdruziak said:
Sorry I don't know the answer to that yet.
Click to expand...

To me, this is critical. I sold my Microtek 120tf MF scanner
and went back to the Epson flatbeds largely because the
Microtek sensor could not scan to the edges of the film image.

The Microtek was a much superior scanner by the numbers
as compared to the Epsons. In the end, I preferred the look
of the Epson scans to those of the Microtek. The Epsons are
already resolving to the dimensions of individual film grains.
The Microtek gave a clearer view into grain structure which
is nice if you're scanning resolution charts, but not so nice if
you're more concerned with the way the scanner renders the
skin tones of people in the photographs.

A lot of the previous posts focus on MTF chart performance.
But clarity and acutance are not my gods. I prefer my Summar
to a Summilux any day. And I print with a diffusion head, not a
condenser head. The Epsons have their limits. But photography
is all about creating the images we see in our heads within the
limits of the tools we choose. And sometimes those limits are
integral to realizing the images we imagine.

Within its limits, the Epsons do really good work, with the
flexibility I need to make digital copies of my negatives for use
on the web. In that sense, my Epson is far superior to the
Microtek (or the Nikon), despite the inferior MTF chart renditions.
 
mdruziak said:
If anyone has any scanned images of USAF 1951 targets made with either the X1 or 9000, please drop me a note
Click to expand...

Hello Mark,

I have a set of scans of the FSR-1T test target (purchased from danes-picta.com), which for many reasons I preferred to the USAF-51.
If you are interested, I can provide you immediately with scans from Nikon 8000, Epson V700 and Minolta 5400; and in a few days from Nikon 9000, Minolta 5400-II, Hasselblad X5 and a couple of drum scanners (Scanview Scanmate 11000 and Screen DTS-1030AI).
 
Sanders McNew said:
The Epsons are
already resolving to the dimensions of individual film grains.
Click to expand...

Yeah, sure.

Not even my Scanmate 11000 (at 11000 dpi) can resolve individual film grains, which are about 0.5 to 10 microns in size (depending on film type etc.).
You are just seeing the largest grain conglomerates with your V700.
 
XFer said:
Yeah, sure.

Not even my Scanmate 11000 (at 11000 dpi) can resolve individual film grains, which are about 0.5 to 10 microns in size (depending on film type etc.).
You are just seeing the largest grain conglomerates with your V700.
Click to expand...

Yeah but you're missing the point. Maybe the Plustek will
scan molecular structure. That's nice for bench data. But
what does it do to the way the photograph looks?
 
Sanders McNew said:
Yeah but you're missing the point. Maybe the Plustek will
scan molecular structure. That's nice for bench data. But
what does it do to the way the photograph looks?
Click to expand...

Your best bet to have film look the way you want, is to start with the highest fidelity copy.
A scanner with better performances (DRange, MTF, CA, flare, gamut) can help you obtaining better copies of your film frame.
This is a good starting point.
Then, you are responsible for the final "look", just like in the wet darkroom.
 
XFer said:
Your best bet to have film look the way you want, is to start with the highest fidelity copy.
A scanner with better performances (DRange, MTF, CA, flare, gamut) can help you obtaining better copies of your film frame.
This is a good starting point.
Then, you are responsible for the final "look", just like in the wet darkroom.
Click to expand...

By your logic, we should all be shooting everything with a DSLR
(or digital MF for those who can afford it) and then backing into
the look we want in post. In your world, why bother shooting
film at all?
 
Sanders McNew said:
By your logic, we should all be shooting everything with a DSLR
(or digital MF for those who can afford it) and then backing into
the look we want in post. In your world, why bother shooting
film at all?
Click to expand...

This comments clearly states that you don't know what you are talking about.
Sorry.
 
XFer said:
This comments clearly states that you don't know what you are talking about.
Sorry.
Click to expand...

Sticks and stones and all of that.

I'll give you a break here. You're only 43 and you
obviously have a lot to learn still about photography.
(And life.) God speed to you.
 
It's gotta be said this is one great looking scanner. It really looks like it's going to be a winner. Now it just needs to be in my (realistic to me) pricing window of around $1500aud.. Please please please...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom