Looking for a scaner

[b4u]

Hi,

I'm looking for a good table scaner which would allow me to scan (eheh) pictures with good quality, and the negatives of my analog photos, also with good quality so I can save them to future use, digital tweak, and digital photo printing.

Some years ago (8-9 years) I worked with a good one (for the time). It was an HP and it was quick ... now looking into this new era of digital photos, I'm looking for an up-to-date hardware for the job.

Not looking for the top-notch, since I'm no professional here (I would probably wouldn't have the cash for it, anyway), but something above common quality, with very nice results.

So I'm a bit off the scaner market right now (did I say a bit? lol ... I'm waaayyyy off it really ), so any suggestions on what to look for, brands, models, ... are all welcome.

Thanks

 

[JackBurton]

Pick out an Epson scanner in your budget. I'm sure you'll be more than happy with just the chepaest scanner though. Epsons are fast and produce great scans. I rank Epson number one in scanners.

 

[Madwand1]

For scanning prints of any sort, you're limited by the output resolution of the print itself, which isn't very high, so any desktop scanner can probably do the job. For scanning 35mm negatives and slides, the general rule has been that you want high resolution, and get better performance from dedicated film scanners. Nikon's still a top player there.

Epson's a good bet if you want scan both prints and film with one device, and also if you need to scan larger format films, because the price for dedicated film scanners goes up greatly at larger sizes.

Some issues with scanning:

1. Dust.

Dust is almost unavoidable, and when you magnify film greatly, you magnify the dust greatly. This makes "digital ICE" a must-have for many people.

2. Grain.

When you magnify greatly, you'll see the film grain. Often you'll want to remove this grain. Some scanner software has built-in grain removal (Kodak's GEM). Plug-in grain removal software tends to work better. E.g. Neat Image.

3. Color correction.

This is an art in itself. There are no simple answers. Some scanner software works better than others with negatives. I've had good results with Nikon software. Many people like Silverfast for this purpose. You typically need to do additional processing in the image editing software after the intial capture. This goes further to brightness / contrast (levels / curves) and also sharpening if wanted.

4. Scanning time.

When you scan in high resolution, your scanning time goes up greatly, as do your image file sizes, and also their processing time. So here, if you can for example choose between a very good 3000 dpi scanner and a so-so 6000 dpi scanner, then 3000 dpi scanner may be preferred, as the 6000 dpi scanner will waste more of your time with less proportional returns.

Some scanners also have automatic film feeds.

Scanning's a bit of a dying art for these reasons; because it's very time consuming and digital capture has a number of additional advantages. I'm glad to see that Epson's still pushing the envelope and producing new products.

 

[GrammatonJP]

I have the epson 4990 with Digital ICE

Digital ICE makes a big difference removing dust.

I use mine to scan 120mm films at 1200dpi. It comes with a tray for 6, takes about 1 hour to scan 6 into the pc.

 

[b4u]

I currently own a Canon EOS 300 35mm SLR Camera. So I do have some collection of 35mm film, and that's a reason why I'm interested in a scanner.

Looking at some options, I have (without too much of a search):
Epson Perfection 4490 PHOTO (4800 x 9600 dpi)
Epson Perfection 4990 PHOTO (4800 x 9600 dpi)
Canon CanoScan 9950F (4800 x 9600 dpi)

So my question is: from a 35mm film, how much pixel resolution can I get from a single photo? How many pixels?

Any specific opinion for this 35mm scanner job?

Anyone knows the difference between Epson Perfection 4990 PHOTO and Epson Perfection 4990 PRO? Can it be just software?

What is the BEST software you can name to scan 35mm films with top quality squeezed from the scanner?

Will interpolation loose quality? Scanner manufacturers often talk about way bigger resolutions using software interpolation. Any special software for the job?

 

[Madwand1]

Don't pay too much attention to interpolated resolutions -- they're just inflated numbers for marketing impact; they'll get you much bigger files; longer processing time, and no better real resolution. If you're dealing with on-screen, don't forget that you'll be limited by 1600x1200 or so at most -- this is around 2 MP (11 MB at 16-bit color X 3), far less than any scanner is able to produce.

Also at larger resolutions, you'll see as much film grain as anything else (not to mention focus/movement problems), so going higher than say around 4000 dpi is not going to get you much. Sharpness / focus, colour depth, and good negative processing are going to be more valuable than big pixel figures.

I'd suggest considering dedicated film scanners. The Nikon Coolscan V comes to mind. The discontinued Minolta, if you can still find it anywere.. The Nikon 5000 if you want to go upmarket further. http://www.photo-i.co.uk/ had some comparisons of dedicated film and desktop scanners at least within the earlier desktop scanner reviews. It's probable that things have improved further recently; but also probable, due to optics, that dedicated films scanners still materially outperform consumer flatbed scanners for 35mm film. That said, the Epson desktops can still give you a lot of bang/buck -- I enjoyed using a 2450 long ago, particularly for MF film.

The differences between the standard Epson and the Pro versions are the software packages. Colour calibration in particular, I think. It's probably not worth the price for the pro packages at the entry level. The Nikon software does good negative correction out of the box. Photoshop Elements 3/4 is typically more than fine for photo processing.

I remember getting decent results from Silversoft / Elements when I was using an Epson. But I think I prefer the Nikon at present. Everyone has their preferences; some prefer some radically different third-party sofware.

I'd concentrate on the device first at the entry level, and the software second. You can't improve upon the device without a major upgrade; you can get by with entry level software for a great deal, and upgrade that independently -- you pretty much have to buy the software independently if you want to do that anyways.

Also don't forget to try third-party sources for scanning and photo processing techniques. Much much is dependent on the user not the software. See http://www.scantips.com . Try tools like Neat Image and Focus Magic where appropriate. Also consider going to sites such as http://www.photo.net and browsing their archives and participating, e.g in the Digital Darkroom forum - http://www.photo.net/bboard/forum?topic_id=1701. You'll get a lot more experienced photography and scanning info and activity there.

 

[Madwand1]

Here's a small comparison of the Epson V700 vs. an older Nikon (4000dpi) film scanner. From what I see, the Epson V700 did well.

http://www.photo-i.co.uk/Reviews/interactive/Epson%20V700/page_8.htm

my overall view on 35mm scanning with the V700 is that the quality of scans are as close to a dedicated film scanner as I have seen. The V700 scanner with 35mm film stock has outperformed every flatbed scanner that I have ever reviewed and it comes very close to the Nikon 4000 film scanner.

http://www.photo-i.co.uk/Reviews/interactive/Epson%20V700/page_11.htm

 

[SunSamurai]

If you can find it, the Minolta Dual II-IV were the best buy in this catagory. 6(usable) to 11MP worth of digital information. I have the Dual II, it didnt have the digital ICE and all that jazz, ut Im not going to pay $300+ more for something I can correct in photoshop for free.

Also, invest in a digital camera, esp if youre just going to snap film images and scan them in a film scanner. There is no point to that in the future. Film has a wetlab and digital will have a dry lab.

 

[pkme2]

I use a HP 6300C Scanjet and a Epson 836XL Expression. You can buy a home or professional scanner. It depends on what your usage happens to be and budget.

The HP Scanjet can be found on eBay under $50, or Epson 836XL around $400.
Or you can get a Canon Canoscan 8400F around $124.

Your choice, your budget. Good hunting.

 

[Madwand1]

Originally posted by: aeternitas
it didnt have the digital ICE and all that jazz, ut Im not going to pay $300+ more for something I can correct in photoshop for free.

It's misleading to imply that Digital ICE and software-only processing are the same thing.

 

[Zepper]

This thread belongs in the Peripherals section!

There is a recent thread there that already covers this topic well.

.bh.

 

[Arcanedeath]

The Canon CanoScan 8400F looks like a good deal in its price range. and should do what your looking for.