Best scanning option

P

paulpp

Member
Local time
5:11 PM
Joined
Jul 27, 2009
Messages
35
View My Gallery
Have been disappointed recently (having returned to B&W film) over the quality of commercial scanning which show too much grain albeit on HP5 Plus. Just tried scanning one negative on my old Epson V100 flatbed and got much improved quality (less grain) although the grain tended to return when editing.
Am I expecting too much, shoudl I just use lower ASA film, and/or invest in a better scanner?
 
paulpp said:
Have been disappointed recently (having returned to B&W film) over the quality of commercial scanning which show too much grain albeit on HP5 Plus. Just tried scanning one negative on my old Epson V100 flatbed and got much improved quality (less grain) although the grain tended to return when editing.
Am I expecting too much, shoudl I just use lower ASA film, and/or invest in a better scanner?
Click to expand...

It depends upon what you consider acceptable quality. I find a dedicated scanner (Minolta ScanDual IV) to be superior to my Epson flatbeds. However, the Epson 4490 has ICE, which I prefer for scanning color film, and of course I can only do medium format on the 4490 since the ScanDual IV is for 35mm only. I am satisfied with the quality of my scans. I used Vuescan as my scanning software, YMMV.

In general, the more you spend, the higher the quality output you may be able to get. There are few exceptions.
 
Generally speaking, it pays off to scan at home. As to the grain appearance, I am afraid in order to avoid it you will have to get a diffuse light scanner like the Nikon CS9000 or one of the Imacons.
 
paulpp said:
Have been disappointed recently (having returned to B&W film) over the quality of commercial scanning which show too much grain albeit on HP5 Plus. Just tried scanning one negative on my old Epson V100 flatbed and got much improved quality (less grain) although the grain tended to return when editing.
Am I expecting too much, shoudl I just use lower ASA film, and/or invest in a better scanner?
Click to expand...

HP5 Plus is a ISO 400 film? Some visible grain is to be expected, especially when digitally pushing / pulling via tone curve in Photoshop.

Maybe you could improve exposure in camera?
 
Fujitsu said:
HP5 Plus is a ISO 400 film? Some visible grain is to be expected, especially when digitally pushing / pulling via tone curve in Photoshop.

Maybe you could improve exposure in camera?
Click to expand...

Ditto, 400 and faster films are going to be grainy. You can compensate a little by using a fine grain developer (like Microdol or Perceptol), or simply using a slower film. Using 100 speed film with the afore-mentioned developers will give you minimal grain. I use an Epson 750m scanner with great results.
 
If you're serious a newer/better scanner is probably worth while. The thing to keep in mind though is that scanning requires time and practice to find the settings that work best for a particular kind of film- for best results you need to try scanning at various resolutions to find the one that gives the best highest resolution without grain aliasing problems.
 
What developer are you using? What is your personal E.I.? Exposure-Developer-Time-Temp-Agitation all affect apparent grain. We need more info.
 
I was in at a pro lab once and one of the techs had a show coming up. He had taken some 4x5 shots and blown them up to wall size. Some were scanned on a drum scanner and some were wet prints. The digital prints had more pronounced grain. He admitted that it's true and has learned to put up with it. I notice the same thing and only use film like HP5+ when the grain isn't going to bother me. Otherwise I'll use something slower. I'll still get more grain than a wet print, but I'm getting results that I can show people.
 
What developer are you using? What is your personal E.I.? Exposure-Developer-Time-Tem

What developer are you using? What is your personal E.I.? Exposure-Developer-Time-Tem

Both developing and scanning were done by a lab. It maybe one of the lessons is to DIY?
 
Starting again B/W photography after more than 30 years, my first choice as in the old days was Ilford HP5 in Microphen.
A second hand scanner, a Nikon Cool5 and suddenly frustration happened:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/36573929@N00/3044282308/in/set-72157613813520873/

and

http://www.flickr.com/photos/36573929@N00/3053442055/

Grain, grain and grain - for me too much!

One thing I learned very fast: The Nikon's light is too harsh for silvergrain films and it's necessary to select a film/developer/timing-agitating method to suit the scanners way of reading.

Comparing results with friends changed my brands of film and dev:

Fuji Acros and/or Neopan developed in Diafine:

Acros:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/36573929@N00/3855775945/in/set-72157622007043813/?removed_from_group=1

and in very hard light:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/36573929@N00/4025952198/in/set-72157622617514618/

Neopan:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/36573929@N00/3261354582/in/set-72157613753153050/

Having results without grain normally means that the scanner isn't able to have enough resolution down to the ground of grain as explained in the first post.

Always looking for new hints I found this very helpful pages about scanning:

http://www.boeringa.demon.nl/menu_technic_optimalscanningresolution.htm

Happy Holidays!
Bernd
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom