Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Current Flat Bed Scanners  (Read 3964 times)

Robt

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15
Current Flat Bed Scanners
« on: May 15, 2011, 11:52:33 am »

I have decided to scan some old prints and make contact sheets of my old 30+ yrs of negs, I figyre I can then ident which negs I wish to get serious about keeping.

I have tried to find review sites with not much success.  Many of the old prints are family stuff of my Dad's and the Negitives/Slides are God only knows where. I am in my 60s and have 5 sibs scattered all over so who knows where to look.

I think maybe the Epson 3200 series would work but I'm hoping one of you can point me towards something less than $3200,  Thanks.
Logged
Robert Collins
Seattle

degrub

  • Guest
Re: Current Flat Bed Scanners
« Reply #1 on: May 15, 2011, 12:24:57 pm »

Epson V750 is about the only "reasonable" priced scanner these days that does a decent job IMHO. Silverfast comes with it and is a good program, but has a rather steep learning curve if you have never done scanning before. There are some decent online tutorials for scanning and Silverfast that we can point you too.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/426128-REG/Epson_B11B178061_Perfection_V750_M_Pro_Scanner.html

For the slides, use IT-8 profiling to get the images closer to what is on the slide. Katrin Eismann has some good guides to get you started with image restoration.
Logged

Robt

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15
Re: Current Flat Bed Scanners
« Reply #2 on: May 15, 2011, 02:48:23 pm »

Thank you, degrub.  Since I have posted I went looking for review sites and have managed to make my self very confused.

The Epson v750 seems to be a better choice but many are saying that  consider the Canon 9000F although none I found actually compared to the V750 but usually to the v600.  The price dif is about 400 bucks which I'd like but really would pay the higher for better and easier scans.  Would anybody have an opinion based on using both?

The 9000F plus the extra cost of Silver Fast is about 300 dlrs vs 700. If I plan on scanning most of 40 years I'd be more than willing to pay more. I will make contacts of my neg strip and only fine scan those I wish to keep.

All info will be greatly appreciated.
Logged
Robert Collins
Seattle

dmerger

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 680
Re: Current Flat Bed Scanners
« Reply #3 on: May 15, 2011, 04:10:50 pm »

Robt, your initial question has been asked and answered several times in this forum.  Try doing a search.  You should find a lot of helpful info.
Logged
Dean Erger

degrub

  • Guest
Re: Current Flat Bed Scanners
« Reply #4 on: May 15, 2011, 04:48:22 pm »

That's very easy to do in this arena  ;)

What are you going to use the end result for ?

Do you know if you will be scanning Kodachrome ?

Here are a couple of reviews of the two mentioned.
http://www.filmscanner.info/en/CanonCanoScan9000F.html

http://www.filmscanner.info/en/EpsonPerfectionV750Pro.html

and from here
http://www.imaging-resource.com/SCAN/CS9000/9000F.HTM

The 9000f looks like a reasonable scanner. It opticaly resolves less than the Epson V700/V750 (1700 ppi vs ~2000 ppi) for film , so that will only be an issue for straight enlargement of 35 mm for printing. The LED based light source should reduce the need to profile the scanner with an IT-8 target for all but Kodachrome (assuming there is not a default profile from Canon).

A film scanner will out perform any of these, but adds cost.

What image editing software do you use ?

BTW, Vuescan is a reasonable scanning utility for most purposes and i would use either it or Silverfast if CanoScan does not meet your needs. The nice thing about Vuescan is that one license is good for any scanner while Silverfast is one license per device.

There are technical issues with all of the scanners, but what is good enough depends on the final use.

You might be able to borrow some time on a scanner at a local community college or friends, if you have never done this before, to get a feel for what you are getting into.
Logged

Robt

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15
Re: Current Flat Bed Scanners
« Reply #5 on: May 15, 2011, 06:36:56 pm »

I use PS CS5. I really got more out of the first two links you sent.  The third I had read earlier.

I own a Nikon LS4000 for the past 3 yrs but only my son in law has used it and he complains that it is out of date and slower than a race car out of gas.

What I think I need to see is some tutorials on scaning.  I had envisioned laying out my negs on glass and adding some filtering for the orange mask and getting an digital contact sheet.  Then I would only worry about making real scans of those I needed and the rest leaving in contact form only.  Doesn't appear that I know how to do that so I'll go learn about scanning before spending any on another scanner.

Thanks to all who have helped learn what I need to learn.
Logged
Robert Collins
Seattle

degrub

  • Guest
Re: Current Flat Bed Scanners
« Reply #6 on: May 15, 2011, 06:53:55 pm »

you will be able to get better results with the CS4000 than most any flatbed for the negs. Use Vuescan with it to avoid the hassles of NikonScan for your previews. NS is capable, just has some odd quirks in the UI about saving settings that you have to learn and it is no longer supported. The CS5000 and 9000 did speed things up a little and have better luck with KR. i have had the 4000 and i upgraded to the 5000 for the KR improvement. Either takes some time and effort to learn the scanner and software. There are a few tutorials on scanning around -
www.scantips.com is a good place to start.
Katrin Eismann's books are very good as well.

If you have a lot of slides to go through, the SF200 or SF210 batch feeder are worth it, just search around for the tips and mods to avoid jams. The FH3 strip holders are very fragile. i would suggest getting at least one extra if you have a lot of film strips to go through.

Almost any flatbed will do the print scans. And Vuescan drives almost any scanner.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up