How do you scan your 35mm B&W film?

How do you scan your 35mm B&W film?

  • I use a flatbed scanner - i.e. Epson V750 photo scanner

    Votes: 313 35.6%

  • I use a dedicated 35mm scanner - i.e. a Nikon Coolscan V

    Votes: 360 41.0%

  • I use a dedicated multi-format film scanner - i.e. a Nikon Coolscan 9000

    Votes: 86 9.8%

  • I use a professional scanner - i.e. drum scanner

    Votes: 27 3.1%

  • I send mine away to be scanned

    Votes: 62 7.1%

  • I don't care - I wet print!

    Votes: 31 3.5%
  • Total voters
    879
CK Dexter Haven said:
Has anyone ever compared the Plustek to a Minolta 5400?
Click to expand...

Minolta is a much better Scanner, image wise, but hard to get parts or service
Nikon IV and up are also better than the Plustek and some services are still available

ICE is also better with the Nikon & Minolta

The 7200 dpi of the plustek is not very good, so scanning @ 3600 dpi gives you the same (almost) size as the Minolta or Nikon
 
I use V600. While its not great, it serves it purpose and expectation. (I got it for C$200 so I shouldn't expect it to outperform a $2000 scanner)
Get a nice software though, Silverfast or Vuescan.
I've tempted to try betterscanning glass and see how it goes.
And it also takes 120 films (Which i also do) so it's going well for me.
 
katrak said:
I've constructed a lego scanning system !
Full details are here - http://picabroad.com/lego-scanner/
Even though I have access to a coolscan 9000 I rarely bother now- the quality of this setup easily surpasses the scanning service provided by Snappy Snaps and is at least good enough for A4.
Also it's much quicker - I can "scan" a strip of 6 in 30 seconds.
While you still have to watch out for dust, the specks don't glow as much as when using a proper scanner - I suspect it's to do with the light source,
Click to expand...

Did anyone catch this before the website went down? I sounds really cool but the domain doesn't appear to exist any more.
 
My Epson V500 (8x11, 135, 120 and 4x5 capable) was 135CAD before tax. Easy to work with. Quick. Does scan prints as well. My Pacific Image scanner was 175 USD, no tax, free shipping. Compact design, good resolution. Prices for new.
I see no reason to dunk with DSLR rig and extra PP. Even if I have 5D ($500) and 100L ($800) in used prices.

Back to BW film scanning. Or more less :)
Currently I wet print and scan prints on my flatbed V500. Gives me the image character to be shared on the Internet I was after since I ventured into BW film few years ago.
 
Ko.Fe. said:
My Epson V500 (8x11, 135, 120 and 4x5 capable) was 135CAD before tax. Easy to work with. Quick. Does scan prints as well. My Pacific Image scanner was 175 USD, no tax, free shipping. Compact design, good resolution. Prices for new.
I see no reason to dunk with DSLR rig and extra PP. Even if I have 5D ($500) and 100L ($800) in used prices.

Back to BW film scanning. Or more less :)
Currently I wet print and scan prints on my flatbed V500. Gives me the image character to be shared on the Internet I was after since I ventured into BW film few years ago.
Click to expand...

The important thing is that you're happy. So if the V500 serves your needs, then that's fine.

My DSLR rig cost considerably more than a V500, of course, but I would argue that it produces far better quality, not just than a V500, but than a scanner that costs considerably more than the DSLR rig itself.

But again, whether you need/want this level of quality is your own decision.
 
My level of quality is fine prints with necessary details at 8x10 and bigger prints.
But I'm not into posters printing and looking at 100% crops.
 
I use a refurbished Fuji Frontier. Works like a charm and takes entire rolls at once. Only use my Nikon 5000 ED for slide film these days.


Sent from Tapatalk
 
For B&W I use a Coolscan V and Vuescan. I'm still figuring out the best settings for my taste. Finally learned how to do a batch scan but for some reason the 5th image isn't scanned. I've done the 5th as a single but still makes me wonder what's going on. Anyone?

2015-10-12-0010 by wjlapier, on Flickr
 
Pakon 135 plus even for slides : it needs some minor adjustments, much easier compared to the Epson v750 ( now used for 120 films only).
 
Was using a Plustek 8100 with Silverfast (software would frequently over expose - changing the settings and reverting back would usually resolve the problem but terribly frustrating). Had to sent the first one back due to a dead pixel/line. Negative holders and scan area not always aligned - pre-scanning necessary if you wanted to be sure of getting it right. Still an excellent scanner for the cost.

Now using a Reflecta MF500 as this also accommodates medium format. Definate step up in quality and I find the Cyberview software excellent. I just want a good base scan to edit in Lightroom (dust/scratches not an issue as I develop B&W myself - colour is developed by a pro lab).

I usually scan at 3200 (this is the max on the Reflecta) and the Reflecta seems to have the edge (the Plustek is no slouch!) - will do some better comparisons when time permits.

Medium format on the Reflecta is simply sublime.

Never used a flatbed so cannot comment.
 
Nikon Coolscan 4000ED (aka LS-4000) for convenience, or Fuji X-E2 + Nikkor Micro 60 AF-D + Polaroid slide copier adapter + flash when I want maximum IQ.
Despiting the lesser resolution (16 Vs. 24 Mpx) and not being a dedicated system, I get marginally more detail and less harsh grain from the latter setup.
 
edge100 said:
There's no compelling reason to use a scanner anymore; they're either expensive, bulky, poor quality, inflexible, or some combination of those.
Click to expand...

Disagreed. The Plustek scanners are very reasonably priced (≠ expensive), have a very small footprint (≠ bulky), high scan qualities (≠ poor quality), but yes, they are inflexible because they are intended to be 1-trick ponies, i.e. make great scans.
 
edge100 said:
My D800 comes off the copy stand and takes photos of my kids, sports, landscapes, etc. That's a bit harder to do with a Plustek scanner.
Click to expand...

I agree with this process fully, having used many high-dpi scanners that cost ridiculous amounts and are effectively dead products. :D

Food for though; I scan for archiving. i.e. I put the negatives into storage unless i'm darkroom printing.

Using an Sony A7RII + Tamron 90/2.8 Macro and not even filling the frame gives me a 30megapixel 'scan' and a ton more adjustability in the file since it's uncompressed RAW.

Compared to a 9000 ED which would take ages to operate using ancient (i'm not a particular fan of VueScan) software then doing similar post work.. yeah.. I think the Phase One product should be made 'cheaper' by a well known brand and repeated.

Full-res comparo between my A7RII method and a V500 flatbed.

Mirrorless scanning vs Epson V500 - 35mm negative by Dave Lam, on Flickr
 
I scan raw negatives using VueScan and a PrimeFilm 7250U film scanner. Then I process the raw negative in Adobe Photoshop Elements with Color Perfect plugin software. Final editing is done in Lightroom

John
 
I have an Epson v850. And it gives me amazing scans from 120 and larger. But for 35mm it's seriously lacking. Which is why I only scan darkroom prints. It's easy, good looking alternative and I get the prints exactly as I want them. For larger formats I generally scan first, then make digktal negatives for alternative techniques. For 35mm I print first in darkroom, decide on ones I really like from prints and then scan them and print them again as negatives for alternative printing. I could make analog enlargements but I feel it's too cumbersome :)
 
Santtu Määttänen said:
I have an Epson v850. And it gives me amazing scans from 120 and larger. But for 35mm it's seriously lacking. Which is why I only scan darkroom prints. It's easy, good looking alternative and I get the prints exactly as I want them. For larger formats I generally scan first, then make digktal negatives for alternative techniques. For 35mm I print first in darkroom, decide on ones I really like from prints and then scan them and print them again as negatives for alternative printing. I could make analog enlargements but I feel it's too cumbersome :)
Click to expand...


I think the same could be said of any flatbed scanner. 35mm scanning is simply not very good on a flatbed because of lateral curve. You need some ANR glass to get rid of it.

I honestly don't know why people put so much effort into scanning. Film trumps digital for long term storage.

I make crappy scans for Internet sharing and they work fine for that.


www.stillthrill.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom