Scanner to digitise prints

[BenXiaoHai]

Hey guys, I was just wondering how you all digitise your prints from film to computer. I am assuming mostly use scanner. If so, which scanners are you all using?

The shop I'm going to charges a lot for small resolution scans that aren't even good.

 

[Dwig]

Personally, I scan the original film, whether pos or neg, rather than a print unless the original film is lost or more damaged than the print. As a rule, this will result in the best digital copy. I currently use, and am quite satisfied with, an EPSON v700. I've used for everything from 16mm sub-miniature through 4x5 and 3-1/2x5-1/4 film (color positive, color negative, B&W negative) and prints of various sizes in both color and B&W.

True, scanning a print replicates any darkroom manipulation that would be present in only the print. For many libraries and other archives, scanning the artists handmade print is important. Often, though, they will also scan the original film if available. To quote Ansel Adams (loosely): the film is like a musical score, and a print is a performance.

 

[kipkeston]

Almost any flatbed should do the trick. Using a V750 here.

 

[bmasonoh]

Just recently purchased a V700. I've only scanned a few rolls but am completely satisfied. No buyers remorse here. There will be many who will suggest you buy a much more costly scanner. They are probably right that you'll get better scans, however, for the money the V700 seems completely adequate (unless you want to print really big in which case drum scans are the way to go).

 

[hans voralberg]

Epson V700 or V750, Nikon Coolscan 5000/9000 if you feel rich.

 

[RichardB]

Nikon Super Coolscan ED 5000.
The only way to go.-Dick

 

[morback]

Nikon Super Coolscan ED 5000.
The only way to go.-Dick

Nikon Super Coolscan ED 9000.
The only way to go.

m.
😉

p.s: I have a Plustek 7500 AI that I would like to sell. PM me if interested.

 

[Dwig]

Nikon Super Coolscan ED 9000.
The only way to go.

m.
😉

p.s: I have a Plustek 7500 AI that I would like to sell. PM me if interested.

Actually, if the OP is really interested in scanning only prints the Nikon ED9000, Nikon ED5000, and Plustek 7500 are completely useless for anything other than paperweights. This thread started with a question about a scanner for prints. Film-only scanners don't qualify.

 

[benmacphoto]

Well, from film to computer you could use two different scanners. A dedicated film scanner or a flat bed. I've used the Nikon 4000/5000 and 8000. And Epson V500 and 10000. Personally I find that the 5000, while faster and sharper, adds to the grain. Almost like it is over sharpening. Images from the 4000 were always much nicer.
Both Epsons performed similarly, the 10000 was used for scanning 8x10 negatives in.
I feel that the Nikon scanners have a much better IQ over a flat bed.
But I use the Epson V500 for prints up to about 16x20.

So I would say what it comes down to is the size of the film, and the quality of the output.

Nikon 4000/5000 for 35mm film
Nikon 8000 for 35/120/4x5 film
Epson V500 for 35/120

 

[BenXiaoHai]

Thanks for the replies guys. This is my current situation.
I have only a lab here that develops films for me. But they don't do slides! Their scans are of low resolution and the quality isn't that good.

So I was thinking of either getting a scanner to scan the films or the prints that the shop does.

 

[morback]

Scanning the print would be cheaper, but the output would be the lowest quality possible.
It all depends on the end application.

Do you want to scan for web or for print (on your/other's walls)?

 

[Vincent.G]

A good budget model is the flatbed scanner, Canoscan 8800F. If you keep your negatives well and just want to digitise your negatives to view on a computer screen or share on your blog/flickr, then an affordable mid-range flatbed scanner will suffice.

Caveat emptor: everything depends on how deep your pockets are. For that matter, I would love to have a drum scanner for personal use. =)