Can someone recommend a good scanner?
- Thread starter cayenne
- Start date
I'm sure I have a reputation as a leach, always trying to extract information. If it's any consolation, I am slowly learning and asking fewer dumb questions! :-[
Reading this thread reminded me of my aborted attempt to get my negatives into digital after buying an Epson Perfection 4490 Photo. I only have about a 100 rolls of 36 that maybe half would be scanned. From my maybe 50 conversions I found it tedious and was not pleased with my inability to minimize dust on the negatives. I live in a house with a parrot. Also the holders seem less than ideal.
Then I bought a printer scanner and put the Epson in storage and now I'm wondering if it is worth retrieving it and trying again or alternative?? I'm sure one of you may have a quick answer that would help me to get back on track with this worthy endeavor. Back in the day I was not engaged in any photo forums as I should have been and was just getting into my first DSLR.
Jack
Reading this thread reminded me of my aborted attempt to get my negatives into digital after buying an Epson Perfection 4490 Photo. I only have about a 100 rolls of 36 that maybe half would be scanned. From my maybe 50 conversions I found it tedious and was not pleased with my inability to minimize dust on the negatives. I live in a house with a parrot. Also the holders seem less than ideal.
Then I bought a printer scanner and put the Epson in storage and now I'm wondering if it is worth retrieving it and trying again or alternative?? I'm sure one of you may have a quick answer that would help me to get back on track with this worthy endeavor. Back in the day I was not engaged in any photo forums as I should have been and was just getting into my first DSLR.
Jack
Upvote
0
Just to throw in a curve ball, lot's of photographers have had huge success with camera scans.
Camera Scans: I've bookmarked a bunch of links on the subject ready for when I have a quiet month and have the motivation to get started on digitizing far too many transparencies and negatives. Done right, the results can be compelling, plus the benefit of generating a nice chunky RAW file (vs scanner)
In no particular order:
http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2012/11/11/using-a-dslr-to-scan-negative-film-by-stefan-schmidt/
http://petapixel.com/2014/02/11/neat-diy-projector-rig-lets-digitize-15-slides-per-minute-automatically/
http://www.dpbestflow.org/camera/camera-scanning
http://thedambook.com/downloads/Camera_Scanning_Krogh.pdf
http://petapixel.com/2014/03/30/reflectas-latest-35mm-scanner-digitizes-your-negatives-at-an-insane-10000-dpi/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+PetaPixel+%28PetaPixel%29
http://lensvid.com/gear/scanning-slides-using-a-dslr-the-fast-way/
http://petapixel.com/2012/12/24/how-to-scan-your-film-using-a-digital-camera-and-macro-lens/
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=21877.0
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/scannerless_digital_capture_and_processing_of_negative_film_photographs.shtml
http://petapixel.com/2012/12/24/how-to-scan-your-film-using-a-digital-camera-and-macro-lens/
http://www.scantips.com/es-1.html
https://luminous-landscape.com/articleImages/CameraScanning.pdf
-pw
Camera Scans: I've bookmarked a bunch of links on the subject ready for when I have a quiet month and have the motivation to get started on digitizing far too many transparencies and negatives. Done right, the results can be compelling, plus the benefit of generating a nice chunky RAW file (vs scanner)
In no particular order:
http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2012/11/11/using-a-dslr-to-scan-negative-film-by-stefan-schmidt/
http://petapixel.com/2014/02/11/neat-diy-projector-rig-lets-digitize-15-slides-per-minute-automatically/
http://www.dpbestflow.org/camera/camera-scanning
http://thedambook.com/downloads/Camera_Scanning_Krogh.pdf
http://petapixel.com/2014/03/30/reflectas-latest-35mm-scanner-digitizes-your-negatives-at-an-insane-10000-dpi/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+PetaPixel+%28PetaPixel%29
http://lensvid.com/gear/scanning-slides-using-a-dslr-the-fast-way/
http://petapixel.com/2012/12/24/how-to-scan-your-film-using-a-digital-camera-and-macro-lens/
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=21877.0
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/scannerless_digital_capture_and_processing_of_negative_film_photographs.shtml
http://petapixel.com/2012/12/24/how-to-scan-your-film-using-a-digital-camera-and-macro-lens/
http://www.scantips.com/es-1.html
https://luminous-landscape.com/articleImages/CameraScanning.pdf
-pw
Upvote
0
kphoto99 said:
Fujitsu makes wonderful scanners and have a stand alone network module as well as scanners with built in network.
If you have to ask the price, they are not for you.
I do have a couple older Epson Photo scanners that have the capability to do slides. Epson has no drivers for windows 7 64 bit, but third party drivers work well.
I have yet another Epson photo scanner that does do windows 7 but is sitting due to my now having the V700.
You can have one of the older ones if you pay for packing and shipping. I'd like to send them to a good home.
Photo scanners light slides from the rear rather than reflecting light off a mirror behind the slides. They also have holders to hold slides in place. Those with a large backlight can also handle large format negatives. Mine handled 120 negatives from the 1940's just fine.
Upvote
0
cayenne said:
Forget Silverfish. VueScan beats the pants off every other scanner driver. The interface is, uh, crude, and the quirks take some getting used to, but the results are outstanding. And you never have to worry about an OS upgrade breaking your scanner. Buy the Pro version and you get updates free for life. Not connected to Ed, but a very happy user for over 15 years with just about every make and model scanner you could name.
Upvote
0
pwp said:
Although I've had two Fujitsu scanners and have one right now, I see that they are really concentrating on business and industrial equipment, and don't offer any photo scanners any longer, if they ever did.
Upvote
0
If you are wanting a flat bed scanner to digitize medium format or even large format, Epson is about your only choice. The more expensive models like the V700 will scan large format, while the lower end units scan 35mm and medium format.
None of these are really in the pro range, you get enthusiast for $200-$800. The higher end photo scanners run around 2K, and drum scanners are out of mortal reach. ($30K)
None of these are really in the pro range, you get enthusiast for $200-$800. The higher end photo scanners run around 2K, and drum scanners are out of mortal reach. ($30K)
Upvote
0
Just for the exercise I set up the 5DIII on a boom over a lightbox with the L 100 f/2.8is macro, straightened it all up and copied a couple of mounted 35mm transparencies and a Tri-X B&W negative. I learned a lot just doing this and can immediately see areas for refinement. The results beat the pants off cheapie Frontier scans and also scans from a flatbed Epson Perfection V750.
So just for the exercise I cranked in a lot closer and followed the process used in this Petapixel article:
http://petapixel.com/2012/12/24/how-to-scan-your-film-using-a-digital-camera-and-macro-lens/
If you couldn't be bothered clicking through, you do multiple cropped shots of the transparency and then stitch them together in LR. This is awesome, with a six shot pano of a tiny 35mm transparency, the result rivals a drum scan. This is obviously more time consuming than a single shot, but for those special images it's well worth the time. I only did one, it was my first go and it took me less than ten minutes to shoot and another ten minutes to run the pano process in LR and tidy up in PS CC.
My early lessons were to use Manual exposure, custom white balance and to use live view (tethered) to focus on the grain and to shoot at f/11. Once you've got a workflow going you'd do plenty per hour. I've been putting off doing this for years. ??? Give it a try!
-pw
So just for the exercise I cranked in a lot closer and followed the process used in this Petapixel article:
http://petapixel.com/2012/12/24/how-to-scan-your-film-using-a-digital-camera-and-macro-lens/
If you couldn't be bothered clicking through, you do multiple cropped shots of the transparency and then stitch them together in LR. This is awesome, with a six shot pano of a tiny 35mm transparency, the result rivals a drum scan. This is obviously more time consuming than a single shot, but for those special images it's well worth the time. I only did one, it was my first go and it took me less than ten minutes to shoot and another ten minutes to run the pano process in LR and tidy up in PS CC.
My early lessons were to use Manual exposure, custom white balance and to use live view (tethered) to focus on the grain and to shoot at f/11. Once you've got a workflow going you'd do plenty per hour. I've been putting off doing this for years. ??? Give it a try!
-pw
Upvote
0
pwp said:
WOW..that was a really amazing article!! Thank you, very interesting!!
I plan in the near future to get the canon 100mmL macro lens...and this and other fun projects are on my short list to play with once I get it!!
Cayenne
Upvote
0
I picked up the Epsom V600 and am I disappointed! Reduced down to 4"x6" size, the scans are much noisier than the photo. The trouble shooting guide says nothing to resolve this problem. I had expectations of getting at least the same quality. Was I just foolish to expect that?
Upvote
0
chrysoberyl said:
Need a bit more information. Was source print or film? How old? What software/settings? An image would be helpful.
I've scanned thousands of negatives, slides, and prints over the past several years with film sizes ranging from 8mm to MF and prints to 8x10 - some dating back to the Civil War. My V750 has handled it all, but it took a while to fine tune my process to produce the best images and account for a variety of factors.
Upvote
0
dcm said:
I've done a bit with a Canon 9000F, which is in the same league as the Epson V600, and have gotten acceptable results; however, it did take a few hours of fiddling to get the settings right. What are you scanning? It sounds like you're scanning a printed photo. If so, the original represents the maximum quality you'll achieve with the scan -- there's only so much grain to be acquired by the scan. Have you searched the Web for the techniques others have used? (I'd offer my suggestions, but I was scanning negatives)
Upvote
0
Thanks for the offers to help. I am scanning at 3600 dpi, but have tried 300, 600, 1200 also. All look substantially worse than the photos, consistently. I am comparing the photo and the image at the same size, BTW.
The device will not scan at higher dpi, although those are listed as available as options. It says enough memory is not available, even when 200 mb is available.
This device goes back; degradation of image quality was not what I expected after all the on-line research I did.
But if anyone has additional input...I'll be grateful!
The device will not scan at higher dpi, although those are listed as available as options. It says enough memory is not available, even when 200 mb is available.
This device goes back; degradation of image quality was not what I expected after all the on-line research I did.
But if anyone has additional input...I'll be grateful!
Upvote
0
For my 35mm film "scans" I'm using a cheap East German Pentacon slide copier,
together with a Pentax 100mm macro lens at F11 (reverse mounted for better correction).
Canon MT-24EX is used for back lighting with manual power setting.
The Camera is 5Ds, I shoot RAW, process in DxO RAW converter, and the results are outstanding!
This is the unit (I have a M42 vesion), there are plenty of them on eBay:
together with a Pentax 100mm macro lens at F11 (reverse mounted for better correction).
Canon MT-24EX is used for back lighting with manual power setting.
The Camera is 5Ds, I shoot RAW, process in DxO RAW converter, and the results are outstanding!
This is the unit (I have a M42 vesion), there are plenty of them on eBay:
Upvote
0
chrysoberyl said:
So its a print, not an image. Does the print have any texture or is it glossy and smooth? Some of the finishes (pebble, matte, etc. ) have a texture on the surface or the paper that does not scan well. Depending on the tool you use, you can reduce the effect. Does the scan look good on the screen? Also depends on your output path, it could be something on the print side.
You might print one of the many test charts available on the net using photo paper (smooth, glossy). Then scan, print, and compare as a baseline both on the screen and printed.
I believe scanning is inherently a somewhat lossy experience, you can never get back exactly the pixels that you printed. You do your best to minimize it while scanning and improve it in post.
Here's a 100 year old family photos scanned from black and white prints, then processed in LR. These were each scanned at a higher resolution and downsampled, then exposure/levels adjusted. They look much better than the originals, even without attempting to fix the flaws, tears, etc. that have occurred over the years. If you pixel peep the first one you will notice the fabric pattern in her dress and the texture of the paper. Or the bokeh in the third one.
Edit: I used VueScan to create DNGs and processed them in LR.
Attachments
Upvote
0
Re: Can someone recommend a good scanner?
If you're cashed up to the tune of $1699 and feeling brave there is always the Film Toaster.
I saw this gadget over at Petapixel. It's a camera scan device that looks a lot like a toaster!
http://petapixel.com/2016/02/06/the-1699-filmtoaster-helps-you-digitize-most-film-formats-with-your-digital-camera/
This opens up the area of purpose made gadgets to facilitate camera scans. There must be tens of thousands of home made setups around the planet ranging from Frankenstein-esque to simple and very clever.
This is an area of opportunity.
-pw
If you're cashed up to the tune of $1699 and feeling brave there is always the Film Toaster.
I saw this gadget over at Petapixel. It's a camera scan device that looks a lot like a toaster!
http://petapixel.com/2016/02/06/the-1699-filmtoaster-helps-you-digitize-most-film-formats-with-your-digital-camera/
This opens up the area of purpose made gadgets to facilitate camera scans. There must be tens of thousands of home made setups around the planet ranging from Frankenstein-esque to simple and very clever.
This is an area of opportunity.
-pw
Upvote
0
