wakarimasen
Well-known
Hello folks,
I'd value your opinion on the two attached images:
These are scans of the same negative, taken with a Fuji GS645S.
The first was part of a batch that I returned due to excessive dust and dirt in the scan. The second is what I just received.
Am I being excessively picky or are these just no good?
Best regards,
RoyM
I'd value your opinion on the two attached images:
These are scans of the same negative, taken with a Fuji GS645S.
The first was part of a batch that I returned due to excessive dust and dirt in the scan. The second is what I just received.
Am I being excessively picky or are these just no good?
Best regards,
RoyM
Attachments
Krzys
Well-known
Honestly the first is decent but the second is what I normally expect from a lab.
mfogiel
Veteran
Apart from the dust, both these images can be adjusted in PS anyway. The point though is, that by letting the lab scan your negs, you are likely to get a poorly processed and not so high resolution result, maybe with lots of dust, and you also pay for this. You should do your own math: how much quality you want from your shots and how much do you shoot per year. If you want to be serious about it, the sooner you buy a dedicated film scanner and start scanning yourself, the better the outcome will be. If you feel a Nikon CS9000 is too expensive for you, limit yourself to shooting 35mm and get a good 35mm scanner.
wakarimasen
Well-known
I am watching a few Epson 4490 scanners on ebay - and planning on developing myself too. This part of the film process - and the use of labs - has been the biggest disappointment to me so far!
MCTuomey
Veteran
when i returned to B&W 35mm film, my initial workflow depended on local labs for processing and scanning. eventually i migrated to scanning and developing at home because of poor quality service: scratched negatives, dust-ridden scans, etc. if i learned anything about the hybrid film-to-digi process, it's that buying as capable a scanner as you can afford will result in the greatest satisfaction. actually, if given the choice between high-end lenses or a high-end scanner, i'd take the high-end scanner anyday.
wakarimasen
Well-known
This is how I have ended up too. I have already bought a Minolta Scan Dual II - I know it's not the best, but it does a pretty good job in my eyes. Next is the Epson for medium format - so long as no other bidders want one :bang:
Ronald M
Veteran
Consumer labs always screw up film, prits, scans, one way or another. I do it myself since 1960 and would not bother with photography if I had no darkroom.
Digi is better for those without dark rooms.
Black & white silver film are harder to scan than C41. You need a low contrast neg, one that prints #2 paper with a condenser enlarger.
Delta 100,400 Tmax 100 and 400 and Tri x all scan decently if the contrast is as above.
I can`t get Plus X to work as well no matter what I do. I get blown skies or dark shadows . Yet the film prints beautifully. Don`t understand.
Forget flatbed scanners too. They will drive you nuts for about 50 different reasons including lack of dynamic range and poor film plane positioning/focus. The only decent one is Epson V750 which will do wet scans. If all I had was a flat, I would make a print and scan it or use the scans for web posting.
Look at a Nikon or Plus Tech better model.
Keep your film, darkroom, and GLASS chem bottles spotless or you will become an expert at retouching. Water and air filter are a must for me.
If this is all beyond you, digital is the way to go.
Digi is better for those without dark rooms.
Black & white silver film are harder to scan than C41. You need a low contrast neg, one that prints #2 paper with a condenser enlarger.
Delta 100,400 Tmax 100 and 400 and Tri x all scan decently if the contrast is as above.
I can`t get Plus X to work as well no matter what I do. I get blown skies or dark shadows . Yet the film prints beautifully. Don`t understand.
Forget flatbed scanners too. They will drive you nuts for about 50 different reasons including lack of dynamic range and poor film plane positioning/focus. The only decent one is Epson V750 which will do wet scans. If all I had was a flat, I would make a print and scan it or use the scans for web posting.
Look at a Nikon or Plus Tech better model.
Keep your film, darkroom, and GLASS chem bottles spotless or you will become an expert at retouching. Water and air filter are a must for me.
If this is all beyond you, digital is the way to go.
Fujitsu
Well-known
A hybrid workflow is an option for many. I dont have (or want) a darkroom, but I´m pretty fine with scanning my negs myself and post process in photoshop.
All I need the labs for is development and they newer screwed that up, not even the cheapest. Scanning is another story.
wakarimasen
Well-known
At last - a scan from my £22.49 Epson 3200.....
It's good enough for me!
Best regards,
RoyM
It's good enough for me!
Best regards,
RoyM
shimokita
白黒
why is the last scan facing a different direction? Did the lab or you scan the back of the neg?
Casey
Casey
srtiwari
Daktari
ZeissFan
Veteran
Also, welcome to the world of cleaning up dust spots on scans. Scanning the negative is just the start.
tammons
Established
Nope the 1st 2 are unacceptable IMO.
1 is better than 2 but 2 is really bad.
Probably an inexperienced scan tech or somebody that just did not care.
More likely yesterdays burger flipper.
1 is better than 2 but 2 is really bad.
Probably an inexperienced scan tech or somebody that just did not care.
More likely yesterdays burger flipper.
wakarimasen
Well-known
Maybe the model turned to offer her better side to the camera ?
Oops - that's my fault! I guess I was a little excited about completing a MF scan myself!
Best regards,
RoyM
