Film Negative Scanner

[knyghtfall81]

Am still using film, no inclination as of yet to switch to digital (maybe if they have a full frame sensor i'd think again, ha!) Hence, thinking of getting a negative scanner, mainly cos I want to convert my old negatives to digital files for preservation and uploading on internet.

I'm really clueless about negative scanners, any suggestions anyone? Thanks!

[sbc]

i guess the common n popular ones i can think of would be the Nikon Coolscan series. MUST look for one with ICE or u will spent a lot of time cleaning up the image.
Used to like the Minolta range but I think they r gone now.

[airconvent]

Are you going for semi-professional or consumer ones?
I recently bought an Epson Perfection V100 just to scan in my negatives (I have hundreds!).
Found the quality so-so but scanning VERY slow. Could be because I set to too high DPI.
I think the higher end V300 is faster and has more professional tools bundled.

[knyghtfall81]

After some market research (i.e. asking ard a few photo shops), the sense I get is that the mainstream ones like canon, epson, etc are really more for consumer level prints, unless u pay to get the higher end ones. The opinion is that the best film scanners are the Nikon Coolscan series with ICE technology, but rare in Singapore - though you can get for them on ebay ranging from US$200 and above depending on how old the scanner is. Also heard that HP is recommended, but not sure of the model.

Was also advised that scanning negatives is something that takes quite a bit of commitment beyond just getting the scanner - each slide can take 5 min or more to scan, including touching up and removing the dust and scratches. And was also recommended to get a large harddisk, as the images can go up to 50 - 100 MB per slide! (for really high res)

phew. I might just try fotohub to see how good their scanned images are, and do a bit of cost benefit time aggaration before deciding to get a scanner after all.

[airconvent]

At the recent Comex at the back row of the hall, there was this stand selling professional film scanners. They look pretty expensive to me but I guess that is what you want if you have $$$. The scanner is the size of a mini tower PC...

[enivre]

Depending on what format you use you can either go for a dedicated scanner if you shoot mainly 35mm (nikon coolscan) or an Epson V700 if you shoot in various formats.

While nikon produces dedicated scanners that can scan MF as well, those tend to cost a kidney or two.

I just got my Epson V700 today (after 1yr+ of procastination) and I must say I'm impressed. Sure it's slow at the highest settings, but I'm getting scans that rival an Imacon scan (scanned the same slide on both to compare).

Have fun!

[bedrock]

Originally Posted by enivre Sure it's slow at the highest settings, but I'm getting scans that rival an Imacon scan (scanned the same slide on both to compare). Have fun!

may i know how slow it is in terms of minutes taken to can a slide on the v700?

[enivre]

You can read this guy's rather extensive review on the V700.

http://www.photo-i.co.uk/Reviews/int...700/page_1.htm

[airconvent]

Originally Posted by enivre Depending on what format you use you can either go for a dedicated scanner if you shoot mainly 35mm (nikon coolscan) or an Epson V700 if you shoot in various formats. While nikon produces dedicated scanners that can scan MF as well, those tend to cost a kidney or two. I just got my Epson V700 today (after 1yr+ of procastination) and I must say I'm impressed. Sure it's slow at the highest settings, but I'm getting scans that rival an Imacon scan (scanned the same slide on both to compare). Have fun!

aw shucks! I almost bought the V300 but then thought the main difference was speed and so decided I did not want to pay more for it. Now the V700 is out.....

[enivre]

Originally Posted by airconvent aw shucks! I almost bought the V300 but then thought the main difference was speed and so decided I did not want to pay more for it. Now the V700 is out.....

The V700 has been out for quite some time already, actually I think it's been out for over a year.

[bedrock]

so is the Epson v750

[boochap]

i remember the other cheaper epson V series, only can scan 3 frame of 6x6 each time. the V700 or the older 4870 can do 6 frames. that make a lot of different.

[enivre]

Originally Posted by boochap i remember the other cheaper epson V series, only can scan 3 frame of 6x6 each time. the V700 or the older 4870 can do 6 frames. that make a lot of different.

Unfortunately the holder's can't do 6 frames of 6x7s at a time because two of them get cropped off...

[jsohhl]

in the theory of scanning, it doen't mean that you can at a very high resolution you will get a better result, the optimum scanning resolution is 300DPI for 100% size scanning, so if you are enlarging a scan of a 35 mm negative to 500% than multiplier 300 DPI x 5 times (500 %) that is the resulting resolution of the enlargement is 1500 DPI and actual size should be 6 x 10 inch

Nowadays scanner software are very interligence all you have to do is keep the resolution at 300 DPI and just the specify your enlargement percentage and the software will do the calcution for you

if scan a image above 300 DPI the result will not be better instead it only increse the file size

[ziggy]

I still have a Nikon Coolscan IV from years before and paid about $1,500 for it. It is pretty good. Haven't used it for at least 2 years though. The best was supposed to be the Coolscan 5000 which can do medium format negs.

[enivre]

Originally Posted by jsohhl in the theory of scanning, it doen't mean that you can at a very high resolution you will get a better result, the optimum scanning resolution is 300DPI for 100% size scanning, so if you are enlarging a scan of a 35 mm negative to 500% than multiplier 300 DPI x 5 times (500 %) that is the resulting resolution of the enlargement is 1500 DPI and actual size should be 6 x 10 inch Nowadays scanner software are very interligence all you have to do is keep the resolution at 300 DPI and just the specify your enlargement percentage and the software will do the calcution for you if scan a image above 300 DPI the result will not be better instead it only increse the file size

I think it doesn't SCAN at 300DPI, it outputs the scan at 300DPI... meaning it scans say at 2400DPI, then outputs it to an 8x10" image at 300DPI...

Scanning at 300DPI is way way way way way too low.. unless u want to print a thumbnail..