kshapero
South Florida Man
nice, I'm going to spend some considerable time on this website.jky said:
The pureness of film and rangefinders is what brings me here
- Thread starter kshapero
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 34
- Views 3K
mr roberts
Just R
kshapero,
What would you like to know about the Sprintscan 4000?
I've been using it for years with satisfactory (for my purposes) results. It was the top dog there for a while when it was released and is still sold by Microtek (who made it for Polaroid) under their own part number. The holders and parts are all interchangeable with the Polaroid models. I bought extra slide and neg carriers a while back.
I like the Silverfast scanning solution that shipped with the scanner and have since paid for full versions of the software for my SS4000 and Epson flatbed. I would like to give VueScan a try with it, but haven't taken the time to look into it as yet.
Which model are you looking at?
Bob
What would you like to know about the Sprintscan 4000?
I've been using it for years with satisfactory (for my purposes) results. It was the top dog there for a while when it was released and is still sold by Microtek (who made it for Polaroid) under their own part number. The holders and parts are all interchangeable with the Polaroid models. I bought extra slide and neg carriers a while back.
I like the Silverfast scanning solution that shipped with the scanner and have since paid for full versions of the software for my SS4000 and Epson flatbed. I would like to give VueScan a try with it, but haven't taken the time to look into it as yet.
Which model are you looking at?
Bob
meven
Well-known
kshapero said:
Hi,
This is Dr Yao email: joseph@yao.com in Hong Kong, he is an authorized Bessa and Leica dealer I think. Don't hesitate to ask him questions he always answer very quickly and always have the cheapest gear in excellent conditions.
Last week he told me he was going to Europe so I am not sure he is back now. But try to contact him anyway, he will certainly find something interesting for you.
Cheers
Max
jky
Well-known
kshapero said:
Here's the link to the pdf file:
http://www.ilfordphoto.com/Webfiles/200629163442455.pdf
Have fun...
j
Turtle
Veteran
Absolutely definitely develop your own film and then scan. I say this because I deeply hope that after getting into developing you might discover some space in the garage, find a used enlarger and...DO IT PROPERLY 😉
Developing film is a piece of cake. I do mine here in Kabul for example.
Developing film is a piece of cake. I do mine here in Kabul for example.
kshapero
South Florida Man
I am looking at the Sprintscan 4000mr roberts said:
R
RML
Guest
Akiva,
Dr Yao can be reach at joseph at yao dot com.
Dr Yao can be reach at joseph at yao dot com.
R
RML
Guest
Why didn't I do my own processing? Well, I did for a while but I don't like shooting B&W at all. I've been shooting colour for years and only since going R-D1 I'm doing a little B&W.
Colour film can be cheaper but in general I'd be paying 3 euro per roll here in Holland. Developing will also cost 3 euro or more (though perhaps a few places might do it for a few pennies less). I never got any prints. I scanned with a Minolta Scan Dual 3; a very nice scanner. But after some three years of doing it in this way, I had a backlog of some 200-250 rolls of film. They are still in a box somewhere, unviewed since I got them back from the lab.
Going R-D1 was a deliberate step for me. I investigated the camera and the reported QC problems, sought out the best price at that time, silvered some stocks just to fund the camera, and took the step. I'm never going back again to film.
Colour film can be cheaper but in general I'd be paying 3 euro per roll here in Holland. Developing will also cost 3 euro or more (though perhaps a few places might do it for a few pennies less). I never got any prints. I scanned with a Minolta Scan Dual 3; a very nice scanner. But after some three years of doing it in this way, I had a backlog of some 200-250 rolls of film. They are still in a box somewhere, unviewed since I got them back from the lab.
Going R-D1 was a deliberate step for me. I investigated the camera and the reported QC problems, sought out the best price at that time, silvered some stocks just to fund the camera, and took the step. I'm never going back again to film.
JoeV
Thin Air, Bright Sun
Solution: El Cheap Flatbed Scanner
Solution: El Cheap Flatbed Scanner
I know that for hi-res scans for outputting to digital prints a dedicated film scanner is recommended. But if your primary interest in scanning film is to post to the internet, I would recommend a flatbed scanner with 35mm film adapter, such as my Epson 2480 or equivalent, which can be purchased for $99 US. That's only about 6 sets of CDs at the prices you quoted, and will give you more than adequate resolution for internet files.
The quality of the tonal range is set by the bit-rate (such as 16-bit B/W), regardless of the scanner's resolution. I find the difference in B/W tonal range between a cheap scanner and an expensive one is negligible compared to the cost difference.
I would also recommend shooting with Ilford XP-2, if you're interested in dedicated B/W 'workflow' (I love that euphamism), since you can get it commercially (C-41) processed anywhere, and in the future it will be compatible with darkroom enlarging onto traditional silver gelatin paper (if that's in the cards).
I might also mention that XP-2 (dye-based emulsion) scans better, with less granularity, than equivalent speed silver halide emulsion film, especially on cheaper scanners.
Alternatively, you can just shoot with the cheapest Walgreens brand color C-41 film, and then use the RGB channels of the resulting scans to do selective contrast control (albiet, at only 8-bits per color - which is why I usually prefer 16 bit B/W in lieu of the color method).
Of course, you can also go with hand-processing of silver gelatin B/W film, too; it's easy and the cost is less per roll than C-41 processing, and you have better control of your negatives' tonal range (i.e. expose for shadows, develop for highlights).
Solution: El Cheap Flatbed Scanner
I know that for hi-res scans for outputting to digital prints a dedicated film scanner is recommended. But if your primary interest in scanning film is to post to the internet, I would recommend a flatbed scanner with 35mm film adapter, such as my Epson 2480 or equivalent, which can be purchased for $99 US. That's only about 6 sets of CDs at the prices you quoted, and will give you more than adequate resolution for internet files.
The quality of the tonal range is set by the bit-rate (such as 16-bit B/W), regardless of the scanner's resolution. I find the difference in B/W tonal range between a cheap scanner and an expensive one is negligible compared to the cost difference.
I would also recommend shooting with Ilford XP-2, if you're interested in dedicated B/W 'workflow' (I love that euphamism), since you can get it commercially (C-41) processed anywhere, and in the future it will be compatible with darkroom enlarging onto traditional silver gelatin paper (if that's in the cards).
I might also mention that XP-2 (dye-based emulsion) scans better, with less granularity, than equivalent speed silver halide emulsion film, especially on cheaper scanners.
Alternatively, you can just shoot with the cheapest Walgreens brand color C-41 film, and then use the RGB channels of the resulting scans to do selective contrast control (albiet, at only 8-bits per color - which is why I usually prefer 16 bit B/W in lieu of the color method).
Of course, you can also go with hand-processing of silver gelatin B/W film, too; it's easy and the cost is less per roll than C-41 processing, and you have better control of your negatives' tonal range (i.e. expose for shadows, develop for highlights).
Last edited:
retrocam
Too many 50mms
I suggest that you get the best scanner you can afford...and then you'll see that labs don't care so much about your negs that they leave scratches on them...soon enough, you'll be developing your own film...and one day, you find yourself standing in your basement or garage or bathroom, contemplating on where to put your enlarger...and so it goes. 😀
kshapero
South Florida Man
A great thread, thanks to all. I am leaving for the Midwest in a week or two to get all my darkroom stuff. It was in my brother's basement. here we go......
40oz
...
retrocam said:
I agree X 1000.
I once thought a "professional" would get better rsults from my film than I would. Now I know that all the dust and scratches on my negs came from the processor, not me. And I'm a slob by any definition 🙂 Dust and scratch-free negs in B&W is easy as pie, and cheaper to boot. The only downside is the relentless movement towards getting an enlarger and making my own prints, if you call an ever-increasing appreciation for quality a "downside."
Ash
Selflessly Self-involved
Scanners are so easy.
I'm finding scratches from my enlarger. I'm quite worried bout the damage but short of a new enlarger, I'm not sure what to do!
I'm finding scratches from my enlarger. I'm quite worried bout the damage but short of a new enlarger, I'm not sure what to do!
eric
[was]: emaquiling
That's about how much process and contacts go for B&W lab. Are you getting it processed and CD for that price?kshapero said:
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
Ash said:
You can't troubleshoot and fix it? Not trying to be snippy or anything, but if an enlarger is scratching your negs, then it has to be something wrong that can be at least understood and likely modified/fixed.
Similar threads
- Article
- Article
