For those unimpressed with their scans...

[JBanderob]

Well as you can tell from my post count, I am still fairly new to shooting film (B+W neg only) and was thoroughly unimpressed with my V550 and epson scan. However last night I bought Vuescan and must say I am very impressed with the differences it has made.
Here is a raw scan I did last night, may be a little small to see much detail in this post, but I am happy with the results. I will try to post a few larger files tonight if anyone is interested in a comparison.

 

[Lauffray]

I remember a similar difference when I switched to VueScan not that long ago. I'm still considering a dedicated 35mm scanner, but for now VueScan is definitely good enough

 

[Hsg]

If you think a straight scan should give you five zones of tones with deep shadows and punchy highlights, you'll be disappointed because just like a b&w print from a negative needed dodging and burning during printing to correct its contrast and bring out detail and separation between tones, the same way the tiff file from a scan needs processing to adjust its contrast and separate tones so your result is not just two shades of gray and lots of muddy detail but a tonally rich b&w image with contrast between tones.

In other words, don't worry if your scans look flat, its just that all detail is compressed in the midrange, which you can see in the histogram. Its up to you during processing to adjusting the contrast and bring out all the detial.

 

[JBanderob]

The main issue before was the incredible amount of noise in the image. I think it had to do with "grain aliasing" however the way vuescan focuses on the negative seems to have made a huge difference... not sure if that is even possible, but seems to be the culprit.

I am just scanning at 1600 dpi right now for the sake of seeing all of my images (10 rolls from Newfoundland last month) and then I will deal with cleaning negatives, higher res scans and post on those I am interested in.

 

[KismetSky]

I'm also using a V550 - will give VueScan a try tonight. Thanks!

 

[Mr_Flibble]

I've been using Vuescan for a number of years now with my aging HP Scanjet G4050. Made a world of difference for me (not to mention it works much faster than the HP software).

 

[Jhausler]

I've recently started using Negfix8 and love it. I set color correction to none in Epson Scan and scan as a positive. That gives me all the details, then i do the rest in LR after negfix goes through them and applies Gamma, does the reversal.

 

[bmattock]

I purchased Vuescan over a decade ago. Love it.

 

[Keith]

I'm about to get vuescan for my i-mac and V700. When I upgraded the mac's OS to El Capitan recently the Epson software became nearly unusable ... it hangs up constantly and does a lot of other weird stuff as well.

And guess what? Apple doesn't really give a toss .... they informed me it's Epson's problem in spite of the fact it was working perfectly prior to the system upgrade. 🙂

 

[Scapevision]

I'm about to get vuescan for my i-mac and V700. When I upgraded the mac's OS to El Capitan recently the Epson software became nearly unusable ... it hangs up constantly and does a lot of other weird stuff as well.

And guess what? Apple doesn't really give a toss .... they informed me it's Epson's problem in spite of the fact it was working perfectly prior to the system upgrade. 🙂

update epson software. known issue.

 

[Keith]

update epson software. known issue.

I did download and install the latest Epson drivers a few weeks ago to no avail. Has it changed since then?

 

[Ko.Fe.]

I have V500 and VueScan for another two 35 scanners.
I like Epson software over VueScan (bugs and crappy settings). I scan bw with V500 and Epson software as color in tiff. And in LR I do some small adjustments. If scanned as bw in Epson sw, yes, it is not so good.
But.
I recommend to OP do same what I do for couple of years now and actually right after writing here. Use bw negative for bw darkroom prints. Scan prints!

 

[2WK]

Have u tried Silverfast?

http://www.silverfast.com/

 

[willie_901]

I tried Silverfast and almost lost my mind.

My personal theory is : every time I scan a negative/transparency with Silverfast the stress reduces my life expectancy by 1 hour.

 

[CliveC]

I have a Canon Canoscan 9000F and have never been satisfied with the scans it produces. They just seem soft to me. Then I bought a Minolta DiMage Scan Dual III and got only marginally better results (worsened by the fact I lose FARE dust removal). Maybe I'm just expecting too much from cheaper devices.

I have to sharpen them quite a bit to see the grain I expected. And don't get me started about adjusting the colour...

 

[Ronald M]

Scanned film is a straight line "curve" just like a digital camera . They both need a mild contrast curve applied .

Your negative appears as if it could use 10% less development. Depending on film, if it prints on a condenser enlarger it is correct.