Topic: Looking for a better MF scanner (Read 12322 times)

harlemshooter · « **Reply #20 on:** May 13, 2009, 10:43:25 am »

get the 9000. well worth the price for what you need to do. keep in mind that both coolscan devices involve substantial processing time (~2 min per slide).

edit: to get pleasing scans, your film will need to be in pristine condition at the time of scanning. this is 4000dpi, afterall.

Quote from: revaaron

I have the epson v500. my posts here show how angry I am at it. now, it's only scanning in purple!
I've got to bring it to a service center. my best laid plans with it when out the window.
I was going to sell it on ebay and use the money to get something better, but it's not worth selling so I will keep it for a flat bed (I also have a hp 5500c scanner that never lived up to what it said it should).

anyhow, now I'm looking for a MF scanner. Does anyone have any recommendations? I want have a glass tray to load the film, ICE, auto-focusing, USB, etc... I needs to be able to scan 6x6, 35mm, slides, and those old film (17mm?) that they had in the 80's everywhere. I looked at the Nikon Coolscan V ($599 is a perfect price) but it looks like it doesn't do MF. the 9000 does scan MF, but $2K is a little too much.

ideas?

narikin · « **Reply #21 on:** May 13, 2009, 10:51:01 am »

another vote for the Nikon, but it must be with a (3rd party) wet mount holder for best results - its easy to do (don't be scared of wet mounting, takes about a minute and gives perfect results)

you'll get countless others telling you to buy an Imacon - but believe me the Coolscan is amazing, and I've used 2 of them, plus a Tango, plus high end $30,000 flatbeds.

terence_patrick · « **Reply #22 on:** May 13, 2009, 02:22:38 pm »

I've got the 9000 and after years of fussing around with different software options, I've learned I get the best results (for me, being closest to a contact print) going back to Nikon Scan and basically turning off all the options available. Once I start turning options on, it looks like crap.

Plekto · « **Reply #23 on:** May 13, 2009, 05:01:55 pm »

The Artixscan 120tf looks nice, but even a properly working Epson is fine. Why? Because honestly, 2400-3000dpi is more than enough for medum format. 3000dpi scanned from 6x6 film is 45 million pixels worth of scanned data. That's plainly overkill already. You just don't need the 4000dpi resolution with film.

That said, the Epson scans both slides and negatives through the glass, which can cause a few problems. The V750, though is still a fine scanner. But it's not really made to be a dedicated film scanner.(though the Epson is a superb scanner for photos and such, no doubt about it)

I'd recommend the Artixscan M1. It's right at that price range that you want to pay and everyone seems to give it good reviews. It's made a bit more for this exact task than as also a normal scanner. It also does auto-focusing which is a nice thing, really.

archivue · « **Reply #24 on:** May 14, 2009, 10:21:16 am »

you should buy a fire wire hard drive, and go renting an imacon... just scan as quick as you can, and finish the process home !

revaaron · « **Reply #25 on:** May 15, 2009, 11:39:39 am »

I've been looking back and forth at the 8000 and 9000 nikon.
I think I want to get a dedicated film scanner (not a flat bed).
The guy where I get my film developed said get a used imacon, but that's still like $6K!
no way.

Also, I organized all the negatives that I had. I bought 200 pages for 35mm and then went through them.
a lot of the 35mm negative holders were empty. and more than I thought were 110 (16mm).
So I would need a 16mm tray too.
no clue how many 16mm there are as I didn't go through them all yet. I know that most of the prints from the 16mm are gone.
Ended up being 50-70 pages (didn't count) of 35-7b pages filled except the film was cut in 4's not 5's.
Then I have about 23 rolls of 120/220 (and I shoot a roll a week).
finally, something like 230 mounted slides.

I'm going to be doing this while doing other work. so I want to set it up in minutes/seconds and then tell it to go and scan.

Also, how do you flatten out film that has been pinched/bent?
What software do people use with the nikon 5000/8000/9000? I'm looking at silverwhatever AI IT8 Studio.

This scanning project for my family archives is getting HUGE. I scanned in 1000's of prints 2-3 times and hated the results. Mailed the prints to scanmyphotos.com and got back "ok" scans. 2730 scanned for $125. Now, I'm using a document feeder to scan the backs for the images and match them back to the original print (so that writing on the back is preserved). Then I'm going to match negative scans back to what I can. This will fill in with overlap the missing negatives (from the prints side) and the missing prints (from the negative side) due to giving them away or photo-booking them. I'm going to end up giving out probably a 1TB drive to my family with web-based software on it so that they can help me organize it and it will synch through a central DB to get dates/locations/comments right. Plus, I can then update when I add more photos. I haven't really even looked into the 4-5 boxes of albums going back to 1850's. This project is pretty much priceless.

revaaron · « **Reply #26 on:** May 17, 2009, 05:42:17 am »

I'm getting a week furlough from my day job. Looks like I will get the 9000 and spend that week scanning.

revaaron · « **Reply #27 on:** June 04, 2009, 01:30:58 pm »

I need to get the glass mount.
besides that this scanner is like wow wow wowie wow.
I'm floored just by the out of box results.

narikin · « **Reply #28 on:** June 04, 2009, 06:13:22 pm »

Quote from: revaaron

I need to get the glass mount.
besides that this scanner is like wow wow wowie wow.
I'm floored just by the out of box results.

glad you think its good, but wait till you get the wet mount glass holder - it simply blows everything away when you use that!

I found the regular glass holder still gave me Newtons Rings, hence my pref for wet mounting. ymmv though.

Bill Caulfeild-Browne · « **Reply #29 on:** June 04, 2009, 10:18:46 pm »

Quote from: revaaron

I need to get the glass mount.
besides that this scanner is like wow wow wowie wow.
I'm floored just by the out of box results.

I think you'll be very happy with the 9000. Mine is still doing yeoman service for many years now.
Bill

jecxz · « **Reply #30 on:** June 04, 2009, 10:30:58 pm »

Quote from: narikin

glad you think its good, but wait till you get the wet mount glass holder - it simply blows everything away when you use that!

I found the regular glass holder still gave me Newtons Rings, hence my pref for wet mounting. ymmv though.

I'm going to second this!

Before switching to digital I wet scanned my transparencies on the Nikon 9000 and it got rid of the Newtonian Rings and greatly improved quality. I used Lumina fluid from ScanScience.com and I highly recommend it. It may be intimidating, but once you get the hang of it it’s fast. Good luck.

Kind regards,
Derek

revaaron · « **Reply #31 on:** June 05, 2009, 02:17:09 am »

you guys cost me so much money....

revaaron · « **Reply #32 on:** June 05, 2009, 02:18:55 am »

I'm scanning at the highest quality shrinking them by 50% and storing them.
a 35MB file should be good enough for most things.

If then I need something "better" I will send it to drum scan.

Geoffrey · « **Reply #33 on:** June 05, 2009, 04:12:19 am »

FWIW, and not to confuse you, the older Imacon 343 must be somewhat cheaper than $5k - it was that new. It willdo up to 6x12 (maybe longer), and has the advantage of ease of use. Digital ICE is an add on piece of software for this, but without the glass holder, its loads easier to scan without debris. I have one, like it a lot. Terrible for slides, tho, as you have to remove them from the mount. But I've scanned 35 mm fiche, and been just delighted with the quality. Had a Minolta Dimage Ultra II, couldn't come close.

On the other hand for simple, easy, workable, but not fine fine work - the Epson 700 is pretty easy to use. I use it for quick scans of slides for projecting. Not sure about printing from it tho. Digital ICE there is a breeze, and the software is very easy. For most things, its a fine scanner, but for high end MF work, I'd do some tests first.

revaaron · « **Reply #34 on:** June 05, 2009, 08:53:29 am »

I'm sure that if I got a epson 700/750 instead of the 500, I would complain as much and would have been "happy" with it. Mostly cause it can auto-focus. I will post the most striking comparison in a little while.

revaaron · « **Reply #35 on:** June 05, 2009, 10:15:27 am »

here is a comparison. This is typical of all the b/w I got out of my epson.
sending it into get serviced made the issue worse.

The epson was scanned with vuescan and a ANR insert on the epson v500.
The nikon was one of my first scans with everything off and me not know what I was really doing.

revaaron · « **Reply #36 on:** June 08, 2009, 10:15:20 am »

anyone got any settings that they use for scanning infrared?
my scans look like crap.

Author Topic: Looking for a better MF scanner (Read 12322 times)

harlemshooter