cabbiinc
Slightly Irregular
B&H used section usually has Epson V500 refurb units for $100. For web use for 120 film I use something that's not even that good.
keytarjunkie
no longer addicted
I make 20x24 digital prints via an Epson V700, I like the quality (I also use an Imacon, and the difference is probably not worth how much it costs and how much service it requires). I've made up to 30x40 prints of 4x5 scans on the V700 too. It's a great scanner.
Lovesong
Member
If you do decide to go with the V500/600, or any flatbed for that matter, have a look at Doug Fisher's holders- head and shoulders above Epson's, holds the film flat, and you can actually adjust it to get the sharpest plane of focus.
http://www.betterscanning.com/
http://www.betterscanning.com/
I use Indie Film Lab. $8 a roll for C41 and B+W including high res scans (Pixel Height: 3,533 Pixel Width: 4,824 -- this is for 645 format)
When the roll is done, you simply download the scans.
They'll hold your negs and ship them in bulk after you've done a bunch of rolls, results in the minimum possible return shipping costs.
When the roll is done, you simply download the scans.
They'll hold your negs and ship them in bulk after you've done a bunch of rolls, results in the minimum possible return shipping costs.
Aristophanes
Well-known
I use a V500 and it is more than adequate for web viewing files. If I want more resolution, I send it out for scanning and printing.
I also am starting to see the merits of the Noritsu's/Frontier's at places like Precision and Indie.
I also am starting to see the merits of the Noritsu's/Frontier's at places like Precision and Indie.
kmallick
Well-known
I don't mean to hijack this thread, but thanks for suggesting the Indie Film Lab. Good to see some options on affordable developing + scanning deal beside PCV and NCPS. How is their turnaround, if I don't mind you asking?
ColSebastianMoran
( IRL Richard Karash )
The machine scans at Precision (sponsor here) and North Coast Photographic Services (San Diego CA) are excellent. Only jpg are available.
thegman
Veteran
I would suggest you have a look at the Canoscan 8800 or 9000, they are pretty cheap, and you can get good results if you work at it:
http://www.imaging-resource.com/SCAN/CS9000/9000F.HTM
It really depends how much resolution and sharpness you need, but I think unless you have very high standards indeed, a flatbed can get very good results.
http://www.imaging-resource.com/SCAN/CS9000/9000F.HTM
It really depends how much resolution and sharpness you need, but I think unless you have very high standards indeed, a flatbed can get very good results.
Indie also uses Noritsu and Frontier and the turn-around is faster than both NCPS and Precision (I've used them all) because you don't have to wait for return mail with Indie, you can simply download. I don't believe they do E6, however. NCPS is the best option for that, as Precision sends the E6 to another lab and bumps the price up to cover it.
$8/roll for dev/scan from Indie is the same as just the B&W upcharge from Precision...
Considering all the time and effort that scanning requires (keeping negs flat, dust spotting, etc.) I can't imagine doing them myself and ending up with a lower res image...
Last rolls sent to Indie took 8 days, and a few minutes to download.
$8/roll for dev/scan from Indie is the same as just the B&W upcharge from Precision...
Considering all the time and effort that scanning requires (keeping negs flat, dust spotting, etc.) I can't imagine doing them myself and ending up with a lower res image...
Last rolls sent to Indie took 8 days, and a few minutes to download.
Sample from Indie, Portra 400. This is straight from the download, no edits.
000098700008.jpg by restoration35, on Flickr
000098700008.jpg by restoration35, on Flickr
kmallick
Well-known
+1 for a Canon 9000F (+ Vuescan + 120 film holder with ANR glass from betterscanning.com). The combo works very well for me for the 120 rolls of B&W I develop myself at home.
MartinP
Veteran
If it is "only" for web-use, and you have a DSLR, just make a negative holder out of mounting-board offcuts and a couple of spring-clips. Suspend this assembly a few feet over a piece of white card lit from at least a few feet away (by almost any sort of desk-lamp or foto-lamp, or even the sun). In my case, I rest my enlarger neg-carrier on a piece of clear perspex, overhanging the reflector, balanced on top of a cardboard-box - but there are an infinite number of ways of arranging things.
Make a careful focus and wriggling-around, using live-view from a tripod, looking at all the corners of your neg, then bracket a few stops to give a choice of exposures. Putting a simple chimney of black card above the neg and around the lens , to reduce unwanted reflections from above the assembly, is a good idea too.
The idea that hundreds of dollars or euros are necessary for quickie scans seems odd. Spend the money on film!! (or send it to me).
Make a careful focus and wriggling-around, using live-view from a tripod, looking at all the corners of your neg, then bracket a few stops to give a choice of exposures. Putting a simple chimney of black card above the neg and around the lens , to reduce unwanted reflections from above the assembly, is a good idea too.
The idea that hundreds of dollars or euros are necessary for quickie scans seems odd. Spend the money on film!! (or send it to me).
Last edited:
PatrickT
New Rangefinder User
I've been scanning my 120 myself on an Epson V500 with decent results. It can certainly be frustrating though.
Now that I've heard about Indie Film Lab (above), I may start doing that!
Now that I've heard about Indie Film Lab (above), I may start doing that!
kuzano
Veteran
Test for benchmark...
Test for benchmark...
I wanted to find out if home scanning was worthwhile. I love to shoot images, but I am not interested in hours spent on scanning film unless I can reach reasonable results.
I sent a couple of rolls of 120 transparency film to a professional lab to get an idea of potential quality. Pricing was very high... with shipping, processing, scanning and ship back, I spent almost $35 for two rolls. Ouch!!
However, then I bought a new V500 Epson, scanned a couple of rolls of 120, plus about 100 35mm slides. The 35mm slides were just OK (for the web), but the holders that come with the Epson for MF are pretty bad. Considered the betterscanning holders, but after spending hours on the various processes, packed the V500 up and sold it.
Now in fairness, I think the V500 is about as capable as scanning gets up to 120/220 using any of the flatbeds I have researched. Going prices on used (and almost always LNIB) is around $100.
I see a lot of referenced to Nikon scanners (8000, 9000). However, since Nikon discontinued those scanners, I see prices up to $4000 for used on eBay. WAY out of any budget I could consider.
Scanning takes a lot of the fun out of film photography for me, if I try to do it. Sorry, but I will pay someone to do it. I spend one heck of a lot of money on my photography. Seems ridiculous to try to shave pennies at the very end of the process. I don't have all my images scanned, so the cost of having scans done is a relatively small part of the game.
Now again, in fairness to those who like to scan, I did do the same exercise a couple of years later with an Epson V750. Same fiddly, constantly tweaking the system, results. Same end result, sold the scanner.
And again my same bottom line. I have lots of money invested in camera gear to get the best images I can. I'm not likely to compromise the images by trying to scan them myself. I constantly hear that even with professional (drum) scanners, it's often more a question of how many hours and expertise the operator has under his/her belt.
I just plain think that home scanning is a waste of both money and my time. Of course if you are only scanning for web... different story. My goal was to scan for print. I don't display my images on the web.
Test for benchmark...
I wanted to find out if home scanning was worthwhile. I love to shoot images, but I am not interested in hours spent on scanning film unless I can reach reasonable results.
I sent a couple of rolls of 120 transparency film to a professional lab to get an idea of potential quality. Pricing was very high... with shipping, processing, scanning and ship back, I spent almost $35 for two rolls. Ouch!!
However, then I bought a new V500 Epson, scanned a couple of rolls of 120, plus about 100 35mm slides. The 35mm slides were just OK (for the web), but the holders that come with the Epson for MF are pretty bad. Considered the betterscanning holders, but after spending hours on the various processes, packed the V500 up and sold it.
Now in fairness, I think the V500 is about as capable as scanning gets up to 120/220 using any of the flatbeds I have researched. Going prices on used (and almost always LNIB) is around $100.
I see a lot of referenced to Nikon scanners (8000, 9000). However, since Nikon discontinued those scanners, I see prices up to $4000 for used on eBay. WAY out of any budget I could consider.
Scanning takes a lot of the fun out of film photography for me, if I try to do it. Sorry, but I will pay someone to do it. I spend one heck of a lot of money on my photography. Seems ridiculous to try to shave pennies at the very end of the process. I don't have all my images scanned, so the cost of having scans done is a relatively small part of the game.
Now again, in fairness to those who like to scan, I did do the same exercise a couple of years later with an Epson V750. Same fiddly, constantly tweaking the system, results. Same end result, sold the scanner.
And again my same bottom line. I have lots of money invested in camera gear to get the best images I can. I'm not likely to compromise the images by trying to scan them myself. I constantly hear that even with professional (drum) scanners, it's often more a question of how many hours and expertise the operator has under his/her belt.
I just plain think that home scanning is a waste of both money and my time. Of course if you are only scanning for web... different story. My goal was to scan for print. I don't display my images on the web.
kmallick
Well-known
Scanning is definitely painstaking but not a waste of time and money for me. It takes patience, good techniques and a workflow that works best for you.
I prefer to scan only those 'with care' that I need for printing. High-res scans in TIFF from labs are expensive, especially ones from 120. But either jpeg scans or small print proofs from labs help me to decide which one need to be scanned with care.
For b&w, I would much rather wet print than spend hours fiddling with scanning. But then again quick scanning helps to identify frames that are the best picks and for web sharing.
As for E-6 slides from 120, I just get sad when I scan them. I would much rather project or at least view them by holding up against light.
BobYIL
Well-known
120 is not like 35mm; I do not think you will have a lot to scan in a week.
Better stay away from the expensive Nikon or Minolta dedicated scanners as they are rather risky to use in the years coming; all have been discontinued. In the meantime I have seen some professional results from the Epson series from V500 up to 750; indeed impressive for both web as well as up to A2 enlargements. In case you come up with a few worth of highest quality then send them to drum scanning.
IMO, a good used V600 can be obtained for around $150 (or a new Canon 9000F for $175) to be an appropriate match for your 635.
Better stay away from the expensive Nikon or Minolta dedicated scanners as they are rather risky to use in the years coming; all have been discontinued. In the meantime I have seen some professional results from the Epson series from V500 up to 750; indeed impressive for both web as well as up to A2 enlargements. In case you come up with a few worth of highest quality then send them to drum scanning.
IMO, a good used V600 can be obtained for around $150 (or a new Canon 9000F for $175) to be an appropriate match for your 635.
Here is the math for my circumstance:
I average mailing about 4 rolls of 120 at a time.
Costs using Indie:
Outbound postage: $0.38/roll ($1.50 per 4 rolls, for USPS first class with tracking -- these travel with priority mail and usually arrive in two days.)
Padded envelope: 0.25
Indie develop and scan: $8
Sales tax: $0.00
Return postage: $0.20 (every six months, 50+ rolls in a medium flat rate priority box at ~$10 = 0.20/roll)
Total: $8.83
Costs if I scan at home: (There is only one local lab that will do C41 and B&W.)
Develop only: $8.88 (including sales tax) for B&W, $7.03 for C41.
Outbound postage: $0.38/roll (can't do it by car, it's 20+ miles or about $7 in gas round trip to drop off the film, and $7 round trip to pick it up.)
Padded envelope: 0.25
Return postage: $1.25/roll (Approx $5 for 4 rolls uncut, via priority mail small flat rate box)
Total: $10.76 for B&W, $8.91 for C41
So it's already more expensive to scan at home, and I don't have any scanned images yet!
Plus I can't get the resolution or the quality, I can't scan infinitely fast, not to mention the tedium of dust spotting, film flatness, and all the rest….
(I suppose I could send the 120 out via the Wal Mart route, which is cheap but would involve driving time and gas expense, and dealing with the Wal Mart vibe, and two week turn around, but I'd still have to do the scanning.)
Bottom line: I'd rather spend my time shooting than scanning.
I average mailing about 4 rolls of 120 at a time.
Costs using Indie:
Outbound postage: $0.38/roll ($1.50 per 4 rolls, for USPS first class with tracking -- these travel with priority mail and usually arrive in two days.)
Padded envelope: 0.25
Indie develop and scan: $8
Sales tax: $0.00
Return postage: $0.20 (every six months, 50+ rolls in a medium flat rate priority box at ~$10 = 0.20/roll)
Total: $8.83
Costs if I scan at home: (There is only one local lab that will do C41 and B&W.)
Develop only: $8.88 (including sales tax) for B&W, $7.03 for C41.
Outbound postage: $0.38/roll (can't do it by car, it's 20+ miles or about $7 in gas round trip to drop off the film, and $7 round trip to pick it up.)
Padded envelope: 0.25
Return postage: $1.25/roll (Approx $5 for 4 rolls uncut, via priority mail small flat rate box)
Total: $10.76 for B&W, $8.91 for C41
So it's already more expensive to scan at home, and I don't have any scanned images yet!
Plus I can't get the resolution or the quality, I can't scan infinitely fast, not to mention the tedium of dust spotting, film flatness, and all the rest….
(I suppose I could send the 120 out via the Wal Mart route, which is cheap but would involve driving time and gas expense, and dealing with the Wal Mart vibe, and two week turn around, but I'd still have to do the scanning.)
Bottom line: I'd rather spend my time shooting than scanning.
kmallick
Well-known
Thats all good. For normal color C41 processing I am with you.
But some of us like to develop B&W at home.
But some of us like to develop B&W at home.
Amen!
kuzano
Veteran
Now!!! There you go..............
Now!!! There you go..............
Those three items you mention in sentence two of paragraph 1.... Don't Gottem!!! Then, beyond that, I heartily respect and relate to what you say.... for you. Scanning, in particular, deciding what to scan and what to take other alternatives, is a delicate balancing act.
It's somewhat like the story about the guys who hire a guide to go "bear hunting".
The first day out in the cabin at the hunt, the "guide" gets up early, get's dressed, and tells the hunters, "you guys wait here in the cabin. I'm gonna go out and have a look around". About an hour later, the hunters hear a commotion outside and look out to see the "guide" running like hell down the hill, an angry bear on his tail, shouting "Open the door... Open the door!!!"
Just at the last moment, he steps aside, lets the bear run into the cabin, reaches in and closes the door, staying outside himself. Then he shouts to the hunters inside... "OK, you guys skin that one out... I'm gonna go get another one!! Be ready for me."
So I say... OK you guys scan those images..... I'm gonna go out and get some more!!!
Now!!! There you go..............
Those three items you mention in sentence two of paragraph 1.... Don't Gottem!!! Then, beyond that, I heartily respect and relate to what you say.... for you. Scanning, in particular, deciding what to scan and what to take other alternatives, is a delicate balancing act.
It's somewhat like the story about the guys who hire a guide to go "bear hunting".
The first day out in the cabin at the hunt, the "guide" gets up early, get's dressed, and tells the hunters, "you guys wait here in the cabin. I'm gonna go out and have a look around". About an hour later, the hunters hear a commotion outside and look out to see the "guide" running like hell down the hill, an angry bear on his tail, shouting "Open the door... Open the door!!!"
Just at the last moment, he steps aside, lets the bear run into the cabin, reaches in and closes the door, staying outside himself. Then he shouts to the hunters inside... "OK, you guys skin that one out... I'm gonna go get another one!! Be ready for me."
So I say... OK you guys scan those images..... I'm gonna go out and get some more!!!
charjohncarter
Veteran
I agree the V500 is great for up to 8x10. I have one and use it almost every other day. I think mine was under $200;
120, 6x9, pardon the wide angle distortion:
