Has Anyone Used the Epson 1680 or Other Scanner for 8X10 Negs

Discussion in 'Photoshop Tutorials' started by Will, Feb 17, 2004.

  1. Will

    Will Guest

    I have a large number of 8X10 B&W negatives to scan and I was wondering if
    anyone had used the Epson 1680 Professional Model with the transparency
    adaptor to scan medium and/or large format B&W negatives and how well this
    scanner worked for this application.

    Or, if anyone has experience with any other flat bed scanner for scanning
    8X10 negatives/transparencies.

    Will J
    Will, Feb 17, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  2. Will

    Guest Guest

    I have a 2450 and it does a reasonably good job on all of the negatives I
    have tossed it from 35mm to the larger sizes. However, it isn't as good as a
    true negative scanner. But, for the money and the fact that it also doubles
    as a regular flatbed scanner, copies, fax, etc. I am perfectly happy with

    Guest, Feb 17, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  3. Will

    Charley Guest

    But none of these scanners have a back light (in the lid) large enough to
    scan an 8 x 10 negative. The bed is large enough but the back light that
    must illuminate the negative is a limiting factor.

    I have the Epson 2450 and frequently scan large negatives up to 4 x 5, but
    the built-in light source limits it's negative handling capability to about
    a 5 x 10 area. The scanner came with plactic frames for holding negatives
    and the largest that they will hold is a 4 x 5. I once had success scanning
    some old glass plate negatives that were about 6 x 5 without using the
    frames, but you have to trick the scanner to make it scan them as negatives
    since it doesn't detect that a frame is in use and defaults to photo
    scanning. At one time I considered using a light box on top of a large
    negative (larger than 4 x 5) so that I could it, but the guy that had asked
    if I could do it for him never brought the negative for by me to try this
    idea out. Maybe this idea will work for you.
    Charley, Feb 17, 2004
  4. Will

    Guest Guest

    What Charley says is true. However, I either don't scan the entire thing
    (crop is something I do most time anyways) or I scan it in pieces and then
    assemble in Photoshop. The scanning in pieces works quite well and it allows
    me to get final images quite large in both dimensions and file size.

    I also don't do 8X10 images often. The film and developing are just too
    expensive so I don't use that camera much. In fact the last time was 2 years
    ago for a trip to Yosemite. For sciences the large format cameras are just
    to die for. Looking at the images from these babies just makes you want to
    cry they are so good.

    Guest, Feb 18, 2004
  5. Will

    Will Guest

    I am looking at the 1680 because it is supposed to scan 8X10 negatives in
    one pass. I have about 100 negatives to scan and the drum scanner guys do a
    great job but charge from $35 to $160 depending on the file size I want. If
    the 1680 doesn't do a good enough job, I may just have to buy a drum

    The more detailed (read more expensive) drum scans produce files of about
    800 meg which print beautifully up to about 48X60 on B&W photo paper using a
    LightJet. This is fine for the 10 best negatives but far too expensive for
    the others. If I can get good 150 MB (20X24 @ 300 ppi) files from the 1680
    that will let me print those up to 20X24 which is fine for most of the

    Will, Feb 18, 2004
  6. Will

    WharfRat Guest

    I have the Epson 1680 -
    and would not reccomend it for anything
    that I would consider quality (let alone "High quality").
    I also have the Agfa DuoScan T2000XL.
    That baby rocks.
    Flat work and transparency work over 12x18.
    Glassless scans for transparencies up to 4x5.
    More dollars - but a sweet unit.

    WharfRat, Feb 19, 2004
  7. Divide the resolution of the scanner by 300 to get the approx degree
    of enlargement it's capable of. So a 1600 dpi scanner will give about
    For an 8x10 original thats a 40x50 print. So the resolution is probably
    fine. Even 4x5 will give 20x25 print. So the other factors to consider
    are the bit depth of the scanner and the max density it can read.
    You should have at least 12 bits per channel. Dmax is not going to
    be a problem for negatives (b&w or color), but may be an issue for
    color transparencies especially if they are slightly underexposed.
    Robert Feinman, Feb 19, 2004
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.