gshybrid
Well-known
First I bought a canon f4000 from keh but returned it because of some funny noises it made. I found a Minolta Elite 5400 and these are my first scans. The detail seems pretty good... almost too good. The film grain is fairly apparent and at %100... well I'm assuming it's the film grain. These were shot with an M3 50 cron with Plus X 125 scanned at 5400 dpi. I like the grain but I want to try a finer grain film and see if the results are different. I'm fairly new to film... in the %100 crop is this the normal appearance of grain at that magnification?
100% crop
100% crop
Sparrow
Veteran
Yep, that's about what I get.
the far eye is starting to go out of focus, the near eye is probably a little behind the focus point but that's probably as good as it gets hand held.
Try a shot with the same kit in good light with xp2, overexposed a bit, at f5.6 on a tripod if you want a benchmark to judge other negs by
the far eye is starting to go out of focus, the near eye is probably a little behind the focus point but that's probably as good as it gets hand held.
Try a shot with the same kit in good light with xp2, overexposed a bit, at f5.6 on a tripod if you want a benchmark to judge other negs by
Gregoryniss
Well-known
nice shots and the scanner looks like it's great!
lorenzo1910
Established
Well the grain on that picture looks a bit more than average...how has been developed the film?
Here you can see a picture taken on Kodak T-Max 400 (developed with Ilford Microphen) and a 100% crop
(the scanner is my old Minolta Scan Dual 2400dpi)
...for sure a "different" development looks...different
I don't think you have any (scanner) noise issues...just a grainy film
Here you can see a picture taken on Kodak T-Max 400 (developed with Ilford Microphen) and a 100% crop
(the scanner is my old Minolta Scan Dual 2400dpi)
...for sure a "different" development looks...different
I don't think you have any (scanner) noise issues...just a grainy film
lorenzo1910
Established
...oh,BTW your scans are beautiful
gshybrid
Well-known
Well the grain on that picture looks a bit more than average...how has been developed the film?
Here you can see a picture taken on Kodak T-Max 400 (developed with Ilford Microphen) and a 100% crop
(the scanner is my old Minolta Scan Dual 2400dpi)
...for sure a "different" development looks...different
I don't think you have any (scanner) noise issues...just a grainy film
The film was processed at a local lab "panda Labs" they have a good reputation... I just realized that it was Tri X 400 not Plus X so that probably explains the amount of grain. I'm going to try a few other films like the 2 suggested here. I've heard good things about Fuji Acros 100 and thought I might give that a try.
lorenzo1910
Established
If you are looking for fine grain go for an Ilford XP2 (as Sparrow said) ...then make a test at lower resolution and print a couple of big size pictures (hi-res/mid-res)...
I've heard complains about hi-res scanning (useless/big files/time waster...)
About the Tri-X...yes it's grainer than T-Max but I'm sure that it could have a better look if developed aiming to get less grain...but I'm pretty sure that that picture will look lovely when printed (IMO Tri-X has a better tonal range)
I've heard complains about hi-res scanning (useless/big files/time waster...)
About the Tri-X...yes it's grainer than T-Max but I'm sure that it could have a better look if developed aiming to get less grain...but I'm pretty sure that that picture will look lovely when printed (IMO Tri-X has a better tonal range)
rbrooks
Established
Let's not confuse the film grain with the scanner itself being in focus. It's a really touchy thing. I guess you're pretty close. But spend more time with the focus control and across the different points on the negative to convince yourself you've got a good understanding of how the scanner focus works across the negative (which always has a buckle or curve to it's surface just to make things difficult)
lorenzo1910
Established
??? The OP never talked about focus issues....
Ronald M
Veteran
The two keys are flat film and film that has not to much contrast.
Lots of threads on getting film flat using reverse curl and book weights.
Some b&w retained silver films scan better than others. Tri X is good. Film developed for a condenser enlarger and #2 paper is a good start but will still have too much contrast for some films even though they print as above. Just keep cutting back time not agitation.
Scan with the KM software provided. Aim for proper color balance if color and no clipping of the histo . Finish in photoshop.
C41 process XP2 is better as are all C41 color films. Convert to monochrome in PS.
Lots of threads on getting film flat using reverse curl and book weights.
Some b&w retained silver films scan better than others. Tri X is good. Film developed for a condenser enlarger and #2 paper is a good start but will still have too much contrast for some films even though they print as above. Just keep cutting back time not agitation.
Scan with the KM software provided. Aim for proper color balance if color and no clipping of the histo . Finish in photoshop.
C41 process XP2 is better as are all C41 color films. Convert to monochrome in PS.
dfoo
Well-known
For low grain in the scanner I find Neopan 100 to be as good as it gets in Rodinal 1:100.
nksyoon
Well-known
This Minolta scanner has a "grain dissolver" function - it's basically a diffuser which is positioned in front of the light source and supposedly reduces apparent grain in the scan. This feature is accessible in Vuescan, can't remember if it's available in the Minolta software.
"Grain Dissolver - This feature enables an optical device to be placed between the film and the optical sensor to reduce the appearance of grain in your scans. It is similar to the Scanhancer product that was developed for the Minolta Dimage Scan Multi Pro. The software forces you to use grain dissolver when Digital ICE is turned on, so this feature is always in use for my scans"
http://www.nathangriffin.com/technical/scanning/index.htm
There's a comparison of scans with and without it here:
http://www.photo-i.co.uk/Reviews/interactive/Scanners/Minolta/page_3.htm
"Grain Dissolver - This feature enables an optical device to be placed between the film and the optical sensor to reduce the appearance of grain in your scans. It is similar to the Scanhancer product that was developed for the Minolta Dimage Scan Multi Pro. The software forces you to use grain dissolver when Digital ICE is turned on, so this feature is always in use for my scans"
http://www.nathangriffin.com/technical/scanning/index.htm
There's a comparison of scans with and without it here:
http://www.photo-i.co.uk/Reviews/interactive/Scanners/Minolta/page_3.htm
gshybrid
Well-known
I made a 13"x !9" print of the third picture and I love the results. The grain gives it the organic quality that I can only mimic with digital. I was woried that the grain was from the scanner but if it's in the negative then I'm happy.
Thanks nksyoon, I noticed that "grain dissolver" function but haven't given it a try yet.
I'm using vuescan and I read that it can produce DNG files but so far I'm only able to make tiffs... does anyone know anything abou this?
amateriat
We're all light!
The scans look good from here, and pretty much mirror my nearly six-years-and-counting experience with my Minolta 5400. Fantastic scanner.
The Grain Dissolver function of the scanner is available both with KM's sofware and VueScan.
I've only bothered with creating TIFFs, so I forget how VueScan deals with making DNG files.
- Barrett
The Grain Dissolver function of the scanner is available both with KM's sofware and VueScan.
I've only bothered with creating TIFFs, so I forget how VueScan deals with making DNG files.
- Barrett
Last edited:
gshybrid
Well-known
The grain dissolver looks like an interesting "analog" feature but being mechanical I assume there is no way to reverse or add it later. Have you tried it? I'm holding off since it seems easier to soften a scan than to add detail after the fact.
I did figure out how to produce DNGs. You have to choose "scan to file" then the appropriate options appear under the output tab. I like this option. I'm sure I am stating the obvious but, I can scan the raw image to a separate hard drive, the image automaically opens as a positive in Camera Raw where I make the broader reversible adjustments. Then open to PS for fine tuning and save the smaller psd or jpeg on my computer leaving the dng on my hard drive. I haven't tried a batch scan this way but so far it's similar to the work flow I use with my digital cameras.
lorenzo1910
Established
Oh...forgot to mention that I have some issue scanning B/W (highlights,sky)...better scanning colour then convert to B/W
lukaz85
Member
I think the grain is correct. I'm using the second version of Minolta's 5400 and often working with Silverfast. For me, the quality of b/w scans with Silverfast is better than with the original software (mainly tonality). But when I need fast scans (or scanning color films), I'm using the Dimage software.
amateriat
We're all light!
The Grain Dissolver works quite well, although I haven't felt the need to use it much (I've used it to save a few shots made under less-than-ideal conditions, dealing with graininess on account of underexposure). When I've felt the need for it, it's come in handy.
- Barrett
gshybrid
Well-known
Do you mean to scan B&W negs using the 48 bit rgb mode? I tried that but I thought the 240mb file might be a storage problem down the road. After a little google searching I see that others are getting good results with this. I'll have to give it a try.
I got to say, I bought an M3 a couple of months ago and the an M6ttl last month and now with this scanner I'm really enjoying the process with shooting film... I haven't shot a single frame on my M8 for 2 month now.
amateriat
We're all light!
I've never had any major problems scanning in 16-bit greyscale, with both conventional and chromogenic b/w negs (and, obviously, this method results in smaller working files–about 70mb in my experience). But, obviously, there's more than one road to Rome here.
- Barrett
- Barrett