Need help with a Epson 4490!!!!

[R|M|D Photography]

I just purchased a Epson 4490 and am trying to scan some B&W 120 negative I just had developed.

Problem I a having is I am on Pro mode and I was assuming I would select the following:

Document type :Film

Film type: B&W Negative film

Image type: 16 bit Greyscale

Resolution: 300 dpi

And then hit preview.


What I get is a total mess of blotchy darkness.

Am I getting the settings wrong? Do I have a junk scanner?

 

[bmattock]

Did you take the removable cover out of the inside of the lid that covers the light that comes down from the top?

 

[R|M|D Photography]

Did you take the removable cover out of the inside of the lid that covers the light that comes down from the top?

yes, most definitly, I am working on a trial scan now, I will post it as an example as soon as its done.

 

[Ossifan]

I had the same problem until I removed the white cover on the inside of the lid, which blocks the light from the top - exactly as bmattock has pointed out.

 

[Madrigal]

If you are using the stock 120 negative tray/carrier, make sure you have it positioned properly. The "B" tab needs to fit right over that tab's imprint on the scanner. Seems obvious, but it took me a few minutes to make sense of it.

FWIW, I like 600 dpi for 120.

 

[R|M|D Photography]

Here is what my results are coming out like with the above settings.

Also before anyone asks, the negative is properly exposed.

 

[R|M|D Photography]

If you are using the stock 120 negative tray/carrier, make sure you have it positioned properly. The "B" tab needs to fit right over that tab's imprint on the scanner. Seems obvious, but it took me a few minutes to make sense of it.

FWIW, I like 600 dpi for 120.

It is, thanks though.

 

[colyn]

Here is what my results are coming out like with the above settings.

Also before anyone asks, the negative is properly exposed.

First off As others have said make sure the white panel on the inside of the lid is removed.

In pro mode click configuration_color and make sure colorsync is unchecked.

If the above doesn't fix the problem try setting to 24 bit true color instead of 16 bit grayscale.

If none of the above works the scanner is defective..

 

[R|M|D Photography]

It seems the only issue we are having is with the Medium format B&W scans. I just ran a color slide thru and it came out great http://st88.startlogic.com/~rmdphoto/images/misc/img004.jpg

 

[colyn]

It seems the only issue we are having is with the Medium format B&W scans. I just ran a color slide thru and it came out great

Have you tried scanning a b&w 35mm neg??

 

[R|M|D Photography]

Have you tried scanning a b&w 35mm neg??

No, unfortunatly I don't have any, all my 35mm is Color slides and all my 120 is B&W.:bang:

 

[R|M|D Photography]

First off As others have said make sure the white panel on the inside of the lid is removed.

In pro mode click configuration_color and make sure colorsync is unchecked.

If the above doesn't fix the problem try setting to 24 bit true color instead of 16 bit grayscale.

If none of the above works the scanner is defective..

This seemes to have fixed it!

Thanks guys!!!!!




....I love this forum!

 

[Madrigal]

Glad you're back online- now, how did those turn?
😉

 

[drewbarb]

Why scan at 300 dpi? Are you only looking for screen/web viewing? I have always heard that you should scan at the highest resolution your scanner will allow, to get the most detail, and then re-size files for your various uses. I understand that you need to print at 300 dpi to get photo quality, but doesn't this mean that if you scan at 300 dpi the largest prints you can make at photo quality will be exactly the same size as your originals?

 

[bmattock]

One would think that scanning at the highest possible 'true' or optical resolution would be the best method. That seems logical.

But scanning at the highest resolution that gives you the results you intend and no higher saves hard drive space, editing time, scanning time, and so on.

Likewise, it is possible now to scan beyond the capability of the film/lens combination to record - so you're arguably just scanning noise at a certain level.

With that said, I do tend to scan MF at the highest rate my 4490 will allow. But I run Vuescan and Linux, and so have no experience with the software the O/P was describing. My CD has never been opened.

 

[R|M|D Photography]

Here are the results, they are a little large so I linked.....

http://st88.startlogic.com/~rmdphoto/KCSR/img001.jpg

http://st88.startlogic.com/~rmdphoto/KCSR/img002.jpg

These are both untouched, just to test the scanner.

As you all were talking, on the 4490 what is the best high resolution to scan at before you get to just scanning noise?

 

[bmattock]

It is going to vary depending on the film, lens, and subject; plus how large you want to print the resulting file - there's no hard and fast rule about how many dpi to use before you're just scanning noise. Try a setting, then edit the file. Try the next level up, edit that file. At some point, you'll notice that you're seeing at lot of garbage instead of sharp lines and smooth textures; unless your lens/film combo is better than the highest resolution on the scanner.

As I said earlier, I often scan at the highest resolution anyway - just because I hate to throw potentially useful data away, and I have the space for 80 mb files (and bigger) per photo. But I'm sure I am recording at least some useless noise in the process. If I tweaked, I'd find the best balance of scanning resolution to image quality. But I'm lazy that way. Feel free to scan at the highest resolution like me - but remember, the scans take longer, the editor takes longer, and the files are bigger - and perhaps you won't see any real gain in exchange for that; or perhaps you will.

 

[Gray Fox]

Hi, I don't want to hijack this thread, but I just got a 4490 and have VueScan Pro just installed. What do you consider the true max resolution of this scanner? I'll be primarily scanning 6x6 and 6x9 on a new dual core machine, so I should be able to handle the large file sizes. Thanks.

 

[bmattock]

I don't know. I have scanned at the highest possible resolution, and I simply found that it gave me no benefit, but slowed down my workflow considerably. This was at odds with all I had done previously with scanning 35mm. So I have dropped my 6x9 scans down to 2400 and even at times 1200, and I am pleased enough with the results. Perhaps if I come across an exceptional negative that I wish to really print large - I'll try a max resolution scan again.

 

[xvvvz]

>>What do you consider the true max resolution of this scanner?<<

Somewhere around half the stated optical resolution (not interpolated). One advantage of scanning at 4800 is that you can then downsample to 2400 which gives you the smaller final file size but a noticable amount of noise in the shadows is often removed during the downsampling process.