Which scanner to buy?

[GeneW]

I would use this mostly for newer color negatives, but also for making some good scans of older B&W negatives and color negatives/slides before they fade anymore into oblivion.

In this case, yes, the 5400 is worth getting. My 5400 is my third film scanner and I've owned the equivalent of the Dual Scan IV and ICE really does make a difference in scanning col negs. You can clean them all you can beforehand, but I've yet to meet a lab that doesn't add scratches and gunk that is embedded in the negs. ICE takes away the pain of cleaning up the defects.

Gene

 

[felipe]

Some (canadian) guy over at photo.net said he was told there'd be a new version of the 5400 coming out in march. Interesting because a) prices for the 5400 should drop, and b) the new model might solve some of the 5400' issues (I suppose there are some are there?)

cheers,
phil


edit:// jezz my grammar.. 🙄

 

[peter_n]

Some (canadian) guy over at photo.net said he was told there'd be a new version of the 5400 coming out in march. Interesting because a) prices for the 5400 should drop, and b) the new model might be solve some of the 5400' issues (I suppose there are some are there?)

Hmmm, great minds Phil... 😉

Say, I've been thinking about getting a film scanner lately, and I have been considering the Konica Minolta IV, having read a review of it in one of the photo mags a while back. You say that several people here use it.

Are people here who use it happy with it?

I would use this mostly for newer color negatives, but also for making some good scans of older B&W negatives and color negatives/slides before they fade anymore into oblivion.

I think its fair to say that people here are happy with the SD IV - I'm certainly happy with mine! 🙂 But if your use is mainly color negatives then you need ICE. My use is almost 100% B&W conventional negs, hence the SD IV.

In this case, yes, the 5400 is worth getting.

Completely agree, Gene. Color scanning requires the ICE software.

 

[stymie]

....ICE really does make a difference in scanning col negs. You can clean them all you can beforehand, but I've yet to meet a lab that doesn't add scratches and gunk that is embedded in the negs. ICE takes away the pain of cleaning up the defects.

Thanks for noting that Gene - and for others who have contributed to this thread. I'm still very wet behind the ears when it comes to photography, and naively assumed my colour negatives would be treated with respect by the photolab 😉

Some questions, if I may be so bold:

When using colour negative, how do your go about scanning? Given that ICE is time and processor intensive, do you scan everything 'quickly' (without ICE) and then assess which shots deserve special treatment?

I'm trying to get a feel for what I am in for if I decide to invest in a scanner.

TIA 🙂

 

[GeneW]

Some questions, if I may be so bold:

When using colour negative, how do your go about scanning? Given that ICE is time and processor intensive, do you scan everything 'quickly' (without ICE) and then assess which shots deserve special treatment?

I often work this way -- I get my col negs developed, no prints, film uncut. I can then cut it into strips of six to minimize my handling time with the scanner -- and I use PrintFile '6 strips of 6' holders to archive everything (24 exp rolls don't fill them up natch, but I prefer to keep a single storage size). I then scan the whole roll in 1300dpi mode without ICE. It goes pretty quickly.

After scanning, I use the Photoshop Contact Sheet II action to create a digital contact sheet that I can refer to later. I make mine 200dpi 10"x8" and find that gives very good onscreen viewing and makes a good enough printout as well.

For web and 4x6" print size, this is as far as I take them. I do the heavy duty scan at 5400dpi and ICE when I want larger prints of certain images.

Having said all that, Bill Mattocks introduced a neat solution. He gets the negs processed and instead of prints, has them scanned to CD. I've done this a couple of times and had pretty decent results -- not as good as home scanning, but less time consuming ...

Gene

 

[Way]

Here's another thread about the Nikon V on photo.net:

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00B6SX

If I only do B&W, would the Minolta Dual Scan IV be enough? I see that the brochure says that it can print 11.8x16.5 @ 250 dpi. Pretty close to the Epson 2200 max size of 13x19. Has anyone printed this large a scan from the 5400?

Both the 5400 and IV are available at a local camera store here. Itching to get going!

Way

 

[dmr]

[snip]
Having said all that, Bill Mattocks introduced a neat solution. He gets the negs processed and instead of prints, has them scanned to CD. I've done this a couple of times and had pretty decent results -- not as good as home scanning, but less time consuming ...

This is what I've been doing lately. There's an indie local camera shop which will do a DO-CD for about $8 and change. If it's any kind of serious work, I go there, and they do a very good job with image files far larger than I will ever use.

If it's casual or family stuff I'll just {blush - I even hate to admit it in a forum like this} take them to Wally World. They won't do it without prints, but prints and CD are cheaper than develop-only and CD at the indie place, and they usually do a not that bad job of it. Good enough for casual work.

I used to get the one guy at a local Target' to do a develop-only with CD (he said they were not really supposed to do that) but the last couple times they did such a vile job on the scans that it wasn't worth it. 🙁

I'm just trying to figure out if it's worth getting my own negative scanner or keep doing it like this.

Oh well ... decisions, decisions ... 🙂

 

[peter_n]

Take another look at the bottom of Jorge Treviño's thread. By request, he has scanned a neg at 2700 and 5400 resolution. Image size is different but to my eye the 2700 scan looks better... 😱

Minolta 5400 Tests

 

[Nikon Bob]

Way

Check here for an explanation of how large a scan you need to print different sizes at 300 dpi http://www.nikonians.org/html/resou...n_and_prints/resolution_and_print_size_1.html . I will say again that the Minolta 5400 at max rez will allow a 16 inch X 24 inch print to be made at 300 dpi without extrapolation. For work flow, I have my negs done at a 1hr lab and use the prints as a basis for selecting which negs I will scan. I have not been too impressed with the scans that I have seen done at Ihr labs locally.

Bob

 

[Nikon Bob]

Peter

I think if you were to enlarge the 2700 scan image to equal the 5400 scan image I think it would look worse.

Bob

 

[Way]

Bob,

Thanks for the link about Resolution and Print Size. Very informative. Looks like I'm leaning towards the 5400! Thanks to all that contributed to this thread. Keep it coming!

Way

 

[Nikon Bob]

Way

For the print size you will get from the Epson printer both the Nikon and Minolta 5400 are likely overkill. They are for my HP 7960. OTH if you want a larger print made at a pro lab you will have the file size to do it.

Bob

 

[Way]

For the print size you will get from the Epson printer both the Nikon and Minolta 5400 are likely overkill. They are for my HP 7960. OTH if you want a larger print made at a pro lab you will have the file size to do it.

Bob

Bob,

So do you think the Dual Scan IV would be fine for my application? I guess a max of 13x19, getting the best quality from the Epson 2200?

Way

 

[Nikon Bob]

Way

Sorry I was thinking 8X10 not 13X19 inches. You will have to do the calculations to see if the Min SD IV will produce a file sized large enough for a 13X19 inch print at 300 ppi. At least with the 5400 or Nikon you should have a very comfortable margin for error and some room to grow. As someone else mentioned, you could wait a bit and see if anything new is announced in March.

Bob

 

[stymie]

I often work this way -- I get my col negs developed, no prints, film uncut. I can then cut it into strips of six to minimize my handling time with the scanner -- and I use PrintFile '6 strips of 6' holders to archive everything (24 exp rolls don't fill them up natch, but I prefer to keep a single storage size). I then scan the whole roll in 1300dpi mode without ICE. It goes pretty quickly.

After scanning, I use the Photoshop Contact Sheet II action to create a digital contact sheet that I can refer to later. I make mine 200dpi 10"x8" and find that gives very good onscreen viewing and makes a good enough printout as well.

For web and 4x6" print size, this is as far as I take them. I do the heavy duty scan at 5400dpi and ICE when I want larger prints of certain images.

Having said all that, Bill Mattocks introduced a neat solution. He gets the negs processed and instead of prints, has them scanned to CD. I've done this a couple of times and had pretty decent results -- not as good as home scanning, but less time consuming ...

Gene

Thanks Gene, that sounds very manageable. I have toyed with the idea of getting the camera store to do the scanning, but I think it gets fairly pricey - $4 to develop and $8 for the CD (for 36 exposures). I may look around at some other stores to see if I can get a better price, otherwise the KM scanner looks very tempting.

One other question. I noticed the Dual Scan IV comes with an external power transformer. While I am currently living in the US, I will be returning to Australia in the next 12 months or so, so I'd like to take the scanner with me. I am guessing that to use the scanner in Australia, I would need to purchase an aftermarket transformer that can opertate on 220-240 VAC.

 

[peter_n]

Or you could get an adapter that plugs into an Oz outlet socket but provides 110V AC to the scanner...