tekgypsy
TekGypsy
GeneW said:
what is the dedicated film scanner? and what is the result of the scan? i assume you are scanning B&W or Color negatives, what comes out? pix or pix of negatives?
Scanner Recommendations Anyone?
- Thread starter Theo-Prof
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 35
- Views 3K
what is the dedicated film scanner? and what is the result of the scan? i assume you are scanning B&W or Color negatives, what comes out? pix or pix of negatives?
R
Roger
Guest
tekgypsy said:
Excuse me for jumping into the middle of this exchange, but I too used to use an Epson flatbed to scan negs and have recently bought the Epson dedicated film scanner. In Japan it's the F-3200 (presumably F for film and 3200 for the dpi resolution). To answer the question, what comes out is a colour corrected real-world image of the scene captured on the negative. You can scan with or without unsharp mask. I usually leave it on--it's very relaxed, and I usually add more sharpening at a later stage.
The resolution claimed by the flatbed was 2,400dpi, but I couldn't see any difference between scans at 1,200 or 2,400 (except for the much longer time taken for the scans). It was marginal for 35mm neg prints (I don't shoot transparencies) but OK for the web. I used it mostly for oddball negatives like my 24 x 58mm negs from the Widelux and 24 x 67mm from the TX-1 panorama cameras. Most of the shots taken with TX-1 in the "rogerama" folder at fujirangefinder.com were scanned this way. For standard negs the Fuji DPE chain scans to CD-ROM are very good. Fast and cheap.
I got very frustrated with it for the 6 x 17cm negs from my big 120-film rotary panorama camera, because it could only scan up to 6 x 9cm negs, so I had to do it in two bites. It's no fun, even if it's not particularly difficult, stitching two halves of the same negative together!
The F-3200 has a number of features I probably won't use all that much--like scanning direct to printer without needing a computer. But it is very good at what it DOES do, which is scan up to 12 std 35mm exposures, or oddball frames like my panorama cameras, and (of course) 120 film negs up to 6 x 18cm.
The scans are fast, and obviously much better than I used to get with the flatbed. I can select much higher resolutions than the mechanical 3,200dpi, but I assume these are interpolated, and probably not worth the extra file size. If anyone's interested, I'll try it and post to the thread.
Roger
Last edited by a moderator:
GeneW
Veteran
Minolta 5400 -- first generation, not the II. It's on the slow side, but it digs deeply into the image and is also a very good B&W scanner. Digital ICE works very well for C-41 and E-6 films. I use the Minolta software for col work, and Vuescan for B&W work.Little Prince said:
Gene
Last edited:
Theo-Prof
Established
Thanks for all the imput. It loks like the best way to go is to get both a film scanner for 35mm and a flatbed for MF and 4x5. I now have to decide which to get first. I can borrow a lower spec Canon flatbed to do some basic scans for the web. At the same time I can evaluate how I like using a flatbed for scanning film. I do think that I will eventually get a dedicated film scanner though.
Kevin
Kevin
back alley
IMAGES
get a used film scanner. much lower price than new, fine for the web and likely printing also if you don't go too big.
joe
joe
Little Prince
Well-known
Any reason I shouldn't go with a Scan Multi II (Minolta)? I know it's SCSI. Anyone here using this?
back alley
IMAGES
i was told that scsi is faster than usb.
my canon is scsi and it's fast.
joe
my canon is scsi and it's fast.
joe
tekgypsy
TekGypsy
backalley photo said:
SCSI is _MUCH_ faster than USB... USB is serial and SCSI is parallel
back alley
IMAGES
you say that like you know it!
i on the other hand am barely computer literate and must rely on the kindness of others...
😉joe
i on the other hand am barely computer literate and must rely on the kindness of others...
😉joe
Little Prince
Well-known
Yup. SCSI is faster no doubt but that's not why I mentioned it. It's supposed to be a very difficult and 'wilful' interface. I'm not computer illiterate at all, but I know people far more literate than I, who don't recommend bothering with SCSI unless you're prepared to deal with all sorts of incompatiblities and what not.
Anyway, I'm not worried about SCSI. Just asking about the scanner itself. Dynamic range and so on.
Anyway, I'm not worried about SCSI. Just asking about the scanner itself. Dynamic range and so on.
R
Roger
Guest
Little Prince said:
Yeah, there are a few "gotchas" to avoid. A good manual usually covers the points to watch like terminations, non-conflicting addresses, etc. You to have to read the manual, though. Far from intuitive.
On a different issue, I thought that USB 2 was faster than SCSI. Is that not true?
sf
Veteran
regarding the Canon 9550F
regarding the Canon 9550F
Assuming I have that product name right (the newest and best Canon all format scanner), I have to add that it has a DMAX rating of 3.8 which is good, but not as good as the Epson 4990 which is, I believe, 4.2. It is worth the extra 100 bucks for that jump in dynamic range.
regarding the Canon 9550F
Assuming I have that product name right (the newest and best Canon all format scanner), I have to add that it has a DMAX rating of 3.8 which is good, but not as good as the Epson 4990 which is, I believe, 4.2. It is worth the extra 100 bucks for that jump in dynamic range.
tekgypsy
TekGypsy
okay folks... it's like this.... there is SCSI I, SCSI II, and SCSI 3... SCSI I has two types, one uses a terminator and the other doesn't... SCSI II is sometimes backwardly compatible with SCSI I and sometimes it isn't (depending on whether you have the one with a terminator or not)... SCSI 3 don't talk to jack sh*t except other SCSI 3...
so, the upshot of this is.. use the damn USB....
oh yeah, BTW... will trade geek knowledge for picture taking black magic
so, the upshot of this is.. use the damn USB....
oh yeah, BTW... will trade geek knowledge for picture taking black magic
Bill K.
Established
I have been looking at an HP 4070 scanner, sold at our local COSTCO for $149.00 CDN. It has a resolution of 2400 DPI. As well as being a flat-bed type, it has special slots for 35mm strips and slides.
The price and claims (on the package) appear to be reasonable. I am wondering if anyone has had any experience with this particular model and if so, would this be a good purchase ?
Thanks for any input and suggetions.
Bill K.
The price and claims (on the package) appear to be reasonable. I am wondering if anyone has had any experience with this particular model and if so, would this be a good purchase ?
Thanks for any input and suggetions.
Bill K.
tamerlin
Registered Newbie
Roger said:
It depends on which SCSI version. Odds are though, the difference won't be nearly enough to
justify the aggrivation in getting the SCSI stuff to work if you don't have it already working, because
there are around 900 different SCSI implementations, not all of them compatible with each other.
And USB is plug and play... and USB 2.0 and FireWire are both very fast.
I'm using an Epson flatbed, and so far it's been working out nicely, but then I'm new at the whole
film thing. 🙂
35mmdelux
Veni, vidi, vici
Check out B&H Photography, New York, for competitive pricing.
