Facing the truth about V500 scans

[remegius]

Wonder if that would help with the V700 as well?

I'll have to give it a go.

The thing is, those Epson negative holders are really horrible, so it's worth experimenting. I'm frankly surprised at how well the one scan I did turned out with the negative lying directly on the scanner glass. I'll do a few more this evening. Hopefully, the rumor that is afloat regarding the possibility of Doug creating holders like his 120 holders for 35mm will end up being true.

Cheers...

Rem

 

[maddoc]

Rem, does the V500 have the same concept of two different optics focused at different heights as the V700 ? Many soft scans with the V700 come from wrong selection of the scanning optics (in the Epson software). If you use a film holder with the V700 you have to select that option and not "film area guide".

 

[Gerry M]

The thing is, those Epson negative holders are really horrible, so it's worth experimenting. I'm frankly surprised at how well the one scan I did turned out with the negative lying directly on the scanner glass. I'll do a few more this evening. Hopefully, the rumor that is afloat regarding the possibility of Doug creating holders like his 120 holders for 35mm will end up being true.

Cheers...

Rem

You can go to his website and click the link to be added to his email list for updates on the new 35mm holder.
Gerry

 

[MaxElmar]

Yep. A dedicated film scanner will always win out over a flatbed. At least with current models out there. If it doesn't, you need a better film scanner. The V500, V700, and V750 are really good for larger formats (especially with wet mounting), but again, for medium format, a Coolscan 9000 will thrash them. Once a year, pick your best negative and have real drum scan done by an experienced professional - then you'll see what's really possible.

My old Coolscan III beats my Epson V750 pretty handily, even after messing around with the adjustable film holders, shimming them with paper, etc. At least it seems that way to me...

 

[nome_alice]

i recently gave up on scanning 35mm on my V700. i just bought an Opticfilm 7600i for that.

The V700 with the Betterscanning 120 holders, ANR glass, and a good dose of Focal Blade sharpening gives exceptional quality for medium format though. I recently got 100x100cm lightjet prints done from my scans for a show and they're fantastic. The lab asked where I got them scanned as the prints looked as good as their inhouse imacon scans. They laughed when I said they were done on a flatbed epson. but i'm sure their imacon scans needed much less post processing and am certain if I wanted to print 200x200cm then we'd really see the winner.

i tried placing film directly on the scanner glass with my V700 and it came out very blurred. I can only guess the V700 and V500 are not the same inside?

 

[thomasw_]

Yep. A dedicated film scanner will always win out over a flatbed. At least with current models out there....

Well strictly speaking this is not the case. Some of the really high end flatbed scanners are able to out perform the current run of dedicated film scanners by quite a margin. Costly, yes.

 

[remegius]

Rem, does the V500 have the same concept of two different optics focused at different heights as the V700 ?

Boy, I don't know the answer to that question, but I'll bet someone around here does. I haven't yet tried to mess with adjusting the height above glass with my Betterscanning 120 holder, but I'll get to that.

Here's the latest try scanning directly on the glass. I did some contrast enhancement, and some sharpening in PS.

And here the straight Costco scan, no adjustments. Pretty clear to me which one is best.

 

[Gerry M]

To my eyes, that is very nicely done.
gm

 

[hans voralberg]

Uhm the Costco scan is worse? I think I'll try the film on glass just to see if it makes any difference as well, though all my current scan is sharp.

 

[remegius]

Uhm the Costco scan is worse?

Well, the scan-on-glass scan actually looks pretty darn good. And it is no doubt as good or better than what I would get using the Epson holder. Even with the ANR glass I have a hard time getting the negative to lay perfectly flat in the holder. That is obviously not an issue when you put the negative directly on the glass. However, I think that if you looked at both files, full size, on a computer you would see that the Costco scan is definitely smoother and sharper out of the box.

Cheers...

Rem

 

[MaxElmar]

"Some of the really high end flatbed scanners are able to out perform the current run of dedicated film scanners by quite a margin. Costly, yes."

I was really talking about the consumer world and DIY scanning - for pro stuff I just hand it to over to a scanning pro - then it's their problem and I don't care what they use.

If you want to get into the pro scanning world - the skill and experience of the operator is probably more important than the technology used.... at least that's what my guy tells me... :>)

 

[MaxElmar]

I think the two examples provided are pretty close, but the Costco scan is pulling a more out of the shadows. Look at the tire and the darker area below the headlight.

 

[hans voralberg]

I think the two examples provided are pretty close, but the Costco scan is pulling a more out of the shadows. Look at the tire and the darker area below the headlight.

That's because he did contrast enhancement on the V500 scan. Increase contrast -> less shadow details.

 

[MaxElmar]

"That's because he did contrast enhancement on the V500 scan. Increase contrast -> less shadow details."

Ok, I see that now. I guess then they look pretty much the same to me. How about some 100% crops - with no "enhancement"?

 

[Matus]

Rem, would you mind to post a few 100% crops (without PS) and stating what was the resolution? I pondering some of the Epson flatbeds (probably the V700 or V750 as I need to scan also 4x5).

 

[katgut@earthlink.net]

You might want to try a different film. I don't like the results I get scanning BW400 with my V500--lacking in sharpness and contrast. But Plus-X is a different matter and comes out very sharp, needing little tweaking.

 

[arthur sadowsky]

Plusteck Opticfilm 7600i

Plusteck Opticfilm 7600i

I recently gave up on scanning 35mm on my V700. I just bought an Opticfilm 7600i for that.

Did you put your Plustek OpticFilm 7600i into work by any chance yet? Could you please up-load some pics you've scanned on your OpticFilm 7600i (direct scans, no manipulation/Photo Shop of any kind if you could🙂)?

I'm doing my research for affordable 35mm film scanner and any info from physical owners is highly valuable to me,

thanks a lot in advance!

 

[remegius]

Did you put your Plustek OpticFilm 7600i into work by any chance yet? Could you please up-load some pics you've scanned on your OpticFilm 7600i (direct scans, no manipulation/Photo Shop of any kind if you could🙂)?

I'm doing my research for affordable 35mm film scanner and any info from physical owners is highly valuable to me,

thanks a lot in advance!

Ditto!

Cheers...

Rem

 

[Roma]

Just as a follow up from me, I went to a frame shop and bought a 4x9-inch non-glare glass for $8.50, put masking tape around the edges so that they don't scratch my V700 scanner bed. I scanned emulsion side down with film directly on the scanner bed and the glass on top of the film and the results are much better that I could get from having film in film holders.
The thing to make sure is that the scanner is set to film area guide.

I can't upload samples right now, but the scans are at least 50% sharper than before.

P.S. but they are still not as sharp as when I scan an 8x10 darkroom print, not the tonality is as good even after post processing

 

[remegius]

The thing to make sure is that the scanner is set to film area guide.

Can't do that with the V500.

Cheers...

Rem