beezil
Established
Let this be the thread to post scans of the new plustek 120!
I am not ready to go just yet, but hopefully will this coming week.
I'll try to get some techpan, tmax100 and some velvia up as soon as i can.
can't wait to see some scans
cheers, gang.
I am not ready to go just yet, but hopefully will this coming week.
I'll try to get some techpan, tmax100 and some velvia up as soon as i can.
can't wait to see some scans
cheers, gang.
DamenS
Well-known
You mean it has actually been released ??!!
PHAROLDO
Member
mani
Well-known
Difficult to say anything directly about scan quality from the size of those images, but they look pretty good to me - and really glad to see it's finally actually out there!! Congratulations on getting the scanner!
beezil
Established
does anyone mind if we establish a format for this thread?
how bout a "web-friendly" full size image, accompanied by a thumbnail of an area within the image that is posted full res so we can see what this 120 can do?
other relevant information would be what film was scanned and the particulars of the scan itself.
otherwise, this thread will be over-run with skepticism and nit-picking....like the other one.
sound like a plan?
how bout a "web-friendly" full size image, accompanied by a thumbnail of an area within the image that is posted full res so we can see what this 120 can do?
other relevant information would be what film was scanned and the particulars of the scan itself.
otherwise, this thread will be over-run with skepticism and nit-picking....like the other one.
sound like a plan?
sny
Member
Sounds like a good idea. I will be posting samples in about a week (the time to familiarize with the scanner and get some nice negatives scanned). I will be focussing on Kodak in 35mm, posting Tri-X and T-Max 400 as B&W, Ektar 100 and Portra 400 as color samples.
Regards,
S.
J. Borger
Well-known
we also have software setting variation.
I would be interested in tmax400! trix or hp5 scans in the following sizes.
35mm. scanned at 3600 dpi
120mm. scanned at 2400 dpi
I would prefer them scanned as positives with all scanneroptions set to Off.
No, sharpening, no dustremoval and no exposure corrections, even no setting of white and black points.
Yes these scans look ugly: but that is my workflow with the plustek 7600 for 35mm. I do all the rest in Photoshop. It,s the best wy to scan B&W with silverfast in my opinion.
Also zero learning curve for the Silverfast software.
With these scans i can judge wether it is worth dropping my V700/plustek 7600 scanners for the Plustek 120.
I hope somebody with the Plustek 120 at hands is able to create these scans for me.
Thanks in advance!
I would be interested in tmax400! trix or hp5 scans in the following sizes.
35mm. scanned at 3600 dpi
120mm. scanned at 2400 dpi
I would prefer them scanned as positives with all scanneroptions set to Off.
No, sharpening, no dustremoval and no exposure corrections, even no setting of white and black points.
Yes these scans look ugly: but that is my workflow with the plustek 7600 for 35mm. I do all the rest in Photoshop. It,s the best wy to scan B&W with silverfast in my opinion.
Also zero learning curve for the Silverfast software.
With these scans i can judge wether it is worth dropping my V700/plustek 7600 scanners for the Plustek 120.
I hope somebody with the Plustek 120 at hands is able to create these scans for me.
Thanks in advance!
bigeye
Well-known
It would be good to know the film format, too. The above look like 4:3 (645?). It should tell us a lot to see how it handles 35mm film.
-Charlie
PHAROLDO
Member
Hello,
The pictures are taken with a contax t3 and fujifilm provia 400x...
So they are 35mm!
All the best
The pictures are taken with a contax t3 and fujifilm provia 400x...
So they are 35mm!
All the best
Matus
Well-known
One more suggestion - since we will only see the scanned photos, not originals (not quite possible 
), maybe the poster could - at least in the case of E6 films - comment on the shadow detail the scanner manages to extract.
), maybe the poster could - at least in the case of E6 films - comment on the shadow detail the scanner manages to extract.
Harry Lime
Practitioner
How is the scanning speed?
thx
thx
mani
Well-known
sny
Member
The scanning speed is very fast if Dust and Scratch reduction and Multi-Exposure are deactivated. I haven't measured, but I would say about 2 minutes for a 35mm frame at 5600 dpi.
Activating Dust and Scratch reduction in Silverfast doubles the scanning time (it first scans the image, then scans a second time for infrared). Activating Multi-Exposure makes the scanner scann a third time the same frame, but this time slower (approximately 1.5-2x slower, these aren't measures, but estimations!).
Regards,
S.
Activating Dust and Scratch reduction in Silverfast doubles the scanning time (it first scans the image, then scans a second time for infrared). Activating Multi-Exposure makes the scanner scann a third time the same frame, but this time slower (approximately 1.5-2x slower, these aren't measures, but estimations!).
Regards,
S.
dcsang
Canadian & Not A Dentist
Dust/Scratch Removal, multi pass, and colour enhancement/correction/restoration - either with Silverfast or ICE/GEM/ROC - really extends the time of any scan.
I would think that the scan time on the Plustek should be, if anything, a bit faster than the 9000 ED if only because there is no autofocus that has to be done. Granted, the AF on the Nikon doesn't suck up a lot of time but I would think that not having to perform the task in the first place would free up a few seconds (maybe 5-10?) in the end.
Cheers,
Dave
I would think that the scan time on the Plustek should be, if anything, a bit faster than the 9000 ED if only because there is no autofocus that has to be done. Granted, the AF on the Nikon doesn't suck up a lot of time but I would think that not having to perform the task in the first place would free up a few seconds (maybe 5-10?) in the end.
Cheers,
Dave
kanzlr
Hexaneur
a scan of a black and white 35mm frame takes about 1 minute, where 20 seconds is the time the scanner takes to initialize and position the holder.
at 5300 dpi that is.
at 5300 dpi that is.
dcsang
Canadian & Not A Dentist
kanzlr
Hexaneur
the scans I did so far are not as sharp as the Nikon scans, honestly.
They are not too far away, but not as sharp. But then, the Nikons are REALLY grainy due to the light
The 120 scans at least are WAY better than from the 4490 I used till now.
I but have to play a bit more with dpi, etc. to judge it. And try raw scans.
They are not too far away, but not as sharp. But then, the Nikons are REALLY grainy due to the light
The 120 scans at least are WAY better than from the 4490 I used till now.
I but have to play a bit more with dpi, etc. to judge it. And try raw scans.
XFer
-
Harry Lime
Practitioner
the scans I did so far are not as sharp as the Nikon scans, honestly.
They are not too far away, but not as sharp. But then, the Nikons are REALLY grainy due to the light
The 120 scans at least are WAY better than from the 4490 I used till now.
I but have to play a bit more with dpi, etc. to judge it. And try raw scans.
Can you make a scan at the highest Plutek dpi and then downscale it to the image resolution equivalent to a 4000 dpi scan from the 9000ED? I would be curious how the grain compares.
But yeah, the light on the 9000ED is pretty hard. I've seen comparisons between it and old Minolta Multipro, which used a florescent tube. It was like looking at the difference between a condenser and diffusion enlarger.
thx
Zonan
Well-known
Agree! I had the Scan MultiPro, and really liked the light source... But with no replacement light tubes available (even from Japan), I grew concerned that I could be out of business if the tube went. With the 9000ED going out of production, I wound up selling the MultiPro and getting one of the last 9000EDs.