Tired of scanning....

[arseniii]

I would normally get a basic scan at the lowest resolution when I process my colour film in the lab, it's 3$ more. It gives me a sort of a digital contact sheet, the prints I like I re-scan on my Coolscan IV and then print. The rest I kiss goodbye 🙂 Scanning whole roles is tedious and unpleasant

 

[Spanik]

I tried that route too but it didn't work out for me. At 11€ you get 1000dpi scans and my experience with automated lab scanners is that they rank up the contrast a lot to give you shots that seem to pop (which also makes it easier to get shadow and highlight color balance in check). - as in your examples
I get the same deal locally here btw.

Well, my first impression was that this were HDR shots.

 

[Lauffray]

When I pay for lab scans I understand I'm paying for convenience (of having someone else do it) more than quality (high res but often over processed or too contrasty)

 

[splitimageview]

Frontier or Noritsu scans can be exquisite. Just have to use a good lab.

I'd go crazy if scanning was strictly flatbed...

Pakon for C41 and B&W rolls (5 min for 36 exp) for me...

 

[MiniMoke]

Well, my first impression was that this were HDR shots.

The first B&W she was jazzed up somewhat, I admit, bit the color scans were just touched up in Lr, some clarity, contrast and sharpening (not much), essentially.

 

[Spanik]

OK, so I'd like to see the originals because what I see now is not what I would want returned from a lab. But I agree already that those might not say much either as a raw scan often needs work.

Otherwise I do agree, scanning is just too much hassle and I'd like to take it out of my flow as well. That's why I came to the thread. but after the images I wasn't convinced at all that it would be an alternative.

 

[ColSebastianMoran]

In the US, scans by Precision (sponsor here) and North Coast Photographic Services are excellent. I can do a little better with my Coolscan V, but only with quite a bit of work. The downside is that jpg (8-bit/channel) is the only option.

Frontier and Noritsu can do good scans. Most mini-labs did scans only good enough for 4x6 prints, in my opinion.

 

[ColSebastianMoran]

And, MiniMoke, your images look good. Thanks for sharing them.

 

[MiniMoke]

OK, so I'd like to see the originals because what I see now is not what I would want returned from a lab. But I agree already that those might not say much either as a raw scan often needs work.

Otherwise I do agree, scanning is just too much hassle and I'd like to take it out of my flow as well. That's why I came to the thread. but after the images I wasn't convinced at all that it would be an alternative.

OK Spanik, here are the original files, original resolution - only .jpg but untouched downloads from the lab. I'll be happy to have your opinion!

Now please all also consider that these pictures were not made with some fancy Leica and Summilux lens, but with my humble Olympus XA and the film is just a Fuji Superia X-Tra 400 ASA.

Lehnen400002925-08 by Frank Lehnen, on Flickr

Lehnen400002925-13 by Frank Lehnen, on Flickr

Lehnen400002925-20 by Frank Lehnen, on Flickr

Lehnen400002925-06 by Frank Lehnen, on Flickr

 

[MiniMoke]

And, MiniMoke, your images look good. Thanks for sharing them.

Thanks you honour 😉

 

[ColSebastianMoran]

And, now, the full size scans look good. I'm betting these are the same scans I get from the two places I mentioned.

 

[traveler_101]

i scan mine at 3000x2000, a whole roll of uncut film under 5mins (!) using the Pakon 135+

though no longer cheap (i bought mine at 250 before shipping), it is still worth a look.

http://www.aaaimaging.com/other-equipment/scanners/kodak-pakon-f135-film-scanner.html

I still have my 3200 ppi minolta but i keep that around in case i need to scan at grain level.

raytoei

Saw a video of the Pakon in action. I don't know about the results but the operation is like a dream come true! You start with the roll of negatives - no cutting, no straightening, no fitting into a damned holder - just get it started and five minutes later you have the scans.

I'd like to get one, but the price has reportedly skyrocketed and you apparently have to have a windows operating system. On top of that I wonder whether it could work on a 240 volt electrical system.

Is there any other scanner that operates this easily?

 

[traveler_101]

To the OP

Sorry for diverting attention from the main concern of your thread. The scans look good to me, but I cannot pay €11 per roll plus the very high mailing costs from Norway. I will say costs are relative: here I was paying the equivalent of €25 a roll before I acquired my flat bed scanner.

 

[Spanik]

OK Spanik, here are the original files, original resolution - only .jpg but untouched downloads from the lab. I'll be happy to have your opinion!

Now please all also consider that these pictures were not made with some fancy Leica and Summilux lens, but with my humble Olympus XA and the film is just a Fuji Superia X-Tra 400 ASA.

Well, that is far more in line of what I'd expect. I think that is an acceptable quality. Now the question is reduced to would I pay that price for it? I recently did some Provia 100 slide film with the V700 and the result is about the same. But the work involved is a lot more. Just getting the dust off, putting the film in the holder, making sure it is flat etc makes this a very unrewarding experience. Certainly if you compare this to the same slide projected. So yes, I could see it as an alternative to home scanning.

I can see why you did the changes to the raw scan now. Probably not what I would do, but that is a matter of taste.

 

[joeswe]

Saw a video of the Pakon in action. I don't know about the results but the operation is like a dream come true! You start with the roll of negatives - no cutting, no straightening, no fitting into a damned holder - just get it started and five minutes later you have the scans.

I'd like to get one, but the price has reportedly skyrocketed and you apparently have to have a windows operating system. On top of that I wonder whether it could work on a 240 volt electrical system.

Is there any other scanner that operates this easily?

I guess other minilab scanners are comparable in convenience (and some models superior in resolution) but they usually are also more costly.

The power adapter of the Pakon will work from anything from 100 to 240 V, no problem there. People are running it on a virtual machine off Apple or modern Windows OSs it seems, but the easiest thing is to have a dedicated older box wich runs Windows XP.

The results are quite good if you can live with the 2000x3000 pixels resolution limit. I especially like that it also gives very nice b&w scans. I bought two of the Pakons when the price was still low (around 300), I am not sure if I would pay 500 or more for such a unit.

 

[MiniMoke]

Well, that is far more in line of what I'd expect. I think that is an acceptable quality. Now the question is reduced to would I pay that price for it? I recently did some Provia 100 slide film with the V700 and the result is about the same. But the work involved is a lot more. Just getting the dust off, putting the film in the holder, making sure it is flat etc makes this a very unrewarding experience. Certainly if you compare this to the same slide projected. So yes, I could see it as an alternative to home scanning.

I can see why you did the changes to the raw scan now. Probably not what I would do, but that is a matter of taste.

Yeah, I just appreciate the quality of the scans - certainly better than anything I got out of my V600 or 9000F MkII scanners, better also than the Plustek 8100 and a bit better than my Coolscan IV (LS-40).

I had to sell all those scanners over the last year and of course there's the time and work used up by scanning.

As to the processing of the negs, well every one had got his own (bad) taste! 😉

 

[traveler_101]

I guess other minilab scanners are comparable in convenience (and some models superior in resolution) but they usually are also more costly.

The power adapter of the Pakon will work from anything from 100 to 240 V, no problem there. People are running it on a virtual machine off Apple or modern Windows OSs it seems, but the easiest thing is to have a dedicated older box wich runs Windows XP.

The results are quite good if you can live with the 2000x3000 pixels resolution limit. I especially like that it also gives very nice b&w scans. I bought two of the Pakons when the price was still low (around 300), I am not sure if I would pay 500 or more for such a unit.

Thanks for your post - very encouraging. But a Pakon 135+ on e-bay with the asking price of $799 has sixteen people watching it! Rather discouraging 🙁. Still looking for an alternative to my flatbed scanner so that I can shoot film at some volume; otherwise it seems like I will have go more toward digital.

 

[FujiLove]

The other advantage of the Pakon is the extremely good colour balance. It has built in profiles for a lot of film, and does a good job even with the ones it doesn't understand. I think this is because it scans the whole roll in one go, so it can compare all the images to eliminate colour casts.

If you get one, make sure you join the Pakon Facebook group. They will get you set up and running.

 

[traveler_101]

The other advantage of the Pakon is the extremely good colour balance. It has built in profiles for a lot of film, and does a good job even with the ones it doesn't understand. I think this is because it scans the whole roll in one go, so it can compare all the images to eliminate colour casts.

If you get one, make sure you join the Pakon Facebook group. They will get you set up and running.

Colour photography doesn't matter too much for me; I've been shooting 100% b&w now for the last few years - though I suppose if I got one of these scanners I could revisit that decision.

I found this (apparently lesser) related model on e-bay. Anyone have an opinion on it?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Nexlab-F-13...627205?hash=item5d5bc57ac5:g:c1QAAOSwuMFUlErs

 

[robert blu]

Being now more involved in instant photography I'm not shooting much conventional film lately, sometimes I shoot Cinestill 50 and send them to this lab for developing and scanning.

To my eye quality is good enough and the price convenient (it would be different if shooting a lot as I did times ago).

robert

m7, cinestill 50