Scanner options

jmraso

jmraso

Newbie
Local time
11:14 PM
Joined
May 15, 2015
Messages
7
Hi all,

I am very new in this forum and am very excited to improve my forgotten film days stuff.

I am on the market for good 35 negative scanner.

Not many option for the Pakon 135 so the Relecta rps 10m though I have read bad critics.

Any help is more than wellcome.

Thanks beforehands.

Jaime Raso
 
jmraso said:
I am on the market for good 35 negative scanner.
Click to expand...

I would recommend finding a used Nikon Coolscan or Minolta Dimage. You'll also need a PC running an older version of Windows compatible with the Nikon/Minolta drivers. The dedicated film scanners made today by Braun, Reflecta or Pakon are not at the level of 10 years ago when scanners were still made by the big brands.

One current option worth considering is the Plustek Opticfilm 8200. Plustek makes a wide variety of scanners, some good, some less so, but the reviews are generally positive.
 
A simple solution is to send your film to Precision (a sponsor here) or North Coast Photographic Services. They use identical equipment and will return nice scans (jpg only). I can do a little better with considerable effort.
 
I have a Minolta Scan Dual IV and an Epson V500, and quite honestly, I prefer the results I get from the Epson.
 
majid said:
I would recommend finding a used Nikon Coolscan or Minolta Dimage. You'll also need a PC running an older version of Windows compatible with the Nikon/Minolta drivers. ...
Click to expand...

I also recommend a Nikon Coolscan IV or V ED. No need to run an older version of Windows or anything else ... Get VueScan, pro version, which drives them very well and is inexpensive—and includes perpetual updates. http://www.hamrick.com

G
 
Thanks a guys,

Very helpful, the Plustek 8200 Ai (for the the calibration thing) is the winner at the moment.

Jaime
 
Thanks,

How slow ? To drive u crazy if you have, let's say, 50 - 100 frames !

That is why I first thought about the Reflecta rps 10m that eats strips, but its reviews are so-so !


majid said:
I would recommend finding a used Nikon Coolscan or Minolta Dimage. You'll also need a PC running an older version of Windows compatible with the Nikon/Minolta drivers. The dedicated film scanners made today by Braun, Reflecta or Pakon are not at the level of 10 years ago when scanners were still made by the big brands.

One current option worth considering is the Plustek Opticfilm 8200. Plustek makes a wide variety of scanners, some good, some less so, but the reviews are generally positive.
Click to expand...

Asprine said:
Do mind the 8200 is very slow.
I'm still very pleased with the Epson v700. Maybe you van find a seconds hand.
Click to expand...
 
Search on the forum for the thread about scanning using a DSLR. I have owned a Nikon coolscan 4000ED, minolta dimage scan dual IV and a Epson V700. All of those are gone and I exclusively use my Nikon D7000 to scan film. It's dead easy with 35mm and is only marginally a pain with MF. Mostly because I'am too cheap to invest in a good copy stand and have to spend time leveling my tripod.
 
I'll go with Plustek over any flatbed if no MF, LF in use.
Slow is only if you are trying it at max or close to it resolution, I guess.
Which isn't practical any way.
 
jmraso said:
How slow ? To drive u crazy if you have, let's say, 50 - 100 frames !
Click to expand...

Not many people have 50-100 keepers to scan at full resolution each time they go on a photography outing, so doing a digital contact sheet of thumbnails at low resolution is what usually happens. You then edit and choose only the best to scan at full resolution. So the Plustek can zip through smaller scans, but the time is taken up in changing film strips. To this end I would still recommend a Plustek, it can produce high quality scans and works on a modern computer, but perhaps look for a cheap flatbed for doing your digital contact sheets.

V
 
V12, that is true. I was thinking about scanning all, let's say 5 rolls from a wedding, and then delete the no-keeper ones, I suppose scanning ain't like downloading cards and delete afterwards but the othe way round.
 
jmraso said:
V12, that is true. I was thinking about scanning all, let's say 5 rolls from a wedding, and then delete the no-keeper ones, I suppose scanning ain't like downloading cards and delete afterwards but the othe way round.
Click to expand...

For film, I have both Nikon Coolscan V and Super Coolscan 9000ED at present. Both have automated feeders for 35mm. So I scan all frames, input them into LR, and use LR as my negative light table. It's a semi-automated process, but not particularly quick. The advantage to it is that each frame is getting an optimized exposure and only one pass is necessary ... the original scans are the end of the scanning work, the rest of the workflow is rendering to a finished product.

If I needed to do it in a production sense like I used to do with film, as in a film workflow that uses a contact sheet model to pick the best negatives to work with, I'd want a full-page transparency scanner (Epson V700/V750 and other models). Then I'd scan a page into a "contact sheet", pick my 'keepers' from that, and re-scan individually at high-rez for finish rendering. This can be a quicker workflow if you are sure that you'll only want a small number out of the total number of exposures.

(If the software being used to drive the flatbed scanner has a way of 'stepping' through the frames and scanning them individually when you lay them out in a holder, that gives you back the individualized frame captures. I've not researched how to do that since I have the film scanners with automated feeds.)

I've done both workflows. I no longer shoot film for such high-volume purposes, nor put processing on a tight time-table—that's where an all-digital workflow has a huge advantage. So the "scan once, render often" methodology with a dedicated film scanner is a better fit to my current needs.

If I sold off the scanners and went to a much lower volume model of individualized optical capture using a DSLR or TTL mirrorless capture camera jig, I'd do my selection as in the film days with a light table and capture only the frames that best suited finish rendering, toss the rest.

There are many ways through a hybrid film-to-digital scanning workflow. :)

G
 
A practical way to go is using any cheap flatbad capable of scanning film to do quick digital contact sheets at a lowish resolution and then to scan the keepers with a dedicated filmscanner.
I have a semi automatic workflow with my Plustek 8100. I'm using the no-thrills built in scanning software (via quickscan button) without any preview. It's capable to put out flat gamma 1.0 scans. So I just need to push a button and everything scans and saves automatically without any adjustments (I batch invert those flat scans with a seperate script for further processing in Photoshop/Lightroom). So the scanning work is only: push the button, wait till it scans, advance the holder, repeat


Scanning at 7200dpi is not really worth it with the Plustek (only if you want to print REALLY BIG). It doubles-triples the scanning time with almost no gain in resolution over 3600dpi. 3600dpi is the sweet spot. 1800dpi is okay if you want to scan fast for web-use.
 
I had a v700 but sold it in favour of the Plustek 8100 - much sharper. I find it far from slow. Using Vuescan, the colours are better than the V700 - especially reds. I was so impressed by the 8100 I bought the Plustek 8100 for medium Format - another impressive scanner.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Plustek-OpticFilm8100-Film-Scanner/dp/B0074H6NLC

I have the Pakon 135+ too. It is excellent and quick. Ideal for web or just seeing what's on the roll.
Pete
 
I'm afraid that the cheapest good quality solution would be one of these Sony A7 bodies and a good repro lens. I think that they have just made a 36MP version - my Coolscan 9000 pulls out a 40MB file from a B&W 24x36mm, so it should be equivalent, and much faster. For medium format we are still quite far away, unless you stitch.
 
What you will find is that anything but the Pakon will result in doing selects somehow, either on a lightbox or digtal contacts, and then scanning those individual frames. Even the so-called fast scanners are slow. The beauty of the Pakon is that it ingests a whole uncut roll in a couple of minutes, and the colors are great. Downside is that the blowout from the CVS store selloff seems to have stopped, and the supply has dried up. If you find one, be aware that there is a 135 and a 135+. The 135+ is the one you want.
 
There's a helpful Facebook Pakon group. I believe some there have managed to get the Pakon working on Apple computers.
Pete
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom