Looking for film scanner

Discussion in 'Scanners' started by ZalekBloom, Apr 26, 2007.

  1. ZalekBloom

    ZalekBloom Guest

    Looking for a scanner to convert my negatives to digital media.
    Nothing fancy, with resolution good to show pictures on 19" PC
    monitor.
    Any idea how long it takes to scan one picture?
    I don't want to spend more then $300.
    Looking on the Web I found:

    Pacific Image PrimeFilm 3610AFL 3600dpi, $ 309.95
    Pacific Image Prime-Film 3650u, 3600dpi - $ 269.95
    Pacific Image Prime-Film 3600u, 3600 dpi, $ 209.95
    Canon Canoscan 8600F Color Image Scanner $163.99
    Microtek ScanMaker i800 $299.84
    Canon CanoScan 4400F Color Image Scanner $89.99

    Which one you recommend?

    Thanks,

    Zalek
     
    ZalekBloom, Apr 26, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. ZalekBloom

    degrub Guest

    Epson

    WHichever package fits your budget
     
    degrub, Apr 26, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. ZalekBloom

    ray Guest

    You can also find some good Epson scanners on the Epson web site -
    neighborhood of $150 or less - the 4490 I have works fine.

    Scanning takes a LONG time - better to have a commercial outfit do them
    for you if your time is worth anything.
     
    ray, Apr 26, 2007
    #3
  4. Anywhere from a couple of minutes to half an hour; not counting any
    restoration or retouching that's necessary.
    I would strongly suggest *not* considering anything that doesn't have
    Digital ICE or equivalent (infrared scan channel plus software to
    interpolate into damaged areas as revealed by the infrared scan channel;
    it eliminates dust and hairs and scratches amazingly well).

    I would not seriously consider any flatbed scanner with transparency
    adapter for 35mm work.

    And I would go up to the Nikon Coolscan V at $500. But I haven't used
    the Pacific Image products, so I'm basing that opinion on reviews, not
    direct personal experience.

    Resolution isn't the issue; the issue is dmax and brightness range. At
    least you're doing negatives, so the dmax issue isn't so severe.

    I can't personally conceive of going to the trouble of scanning a lot of
    film, and not doing TOP quality scans. It's so little more trouble; the
    big cost is your time. I can so easily imagine regretting not having
    done top quality work later on, possibly when it's too late to remedy.
     
    David Dyer-Bennet, Apr 26, 2007
    #4
  5. Add the Plustek Opticfilm 7200. Worth considering. Also that crap about
    scanning time, it all depends on what you are going to USE the scanned
    images for. If all you want to do is digitise your film/slides to show on a
    computer monitor, scanning time is very short. If you want top quality
    prints, it takes a little longer, but up to 10 by 8, image resolution need
    not be all that fine.

    Digital Ice costs money, but saves time in the apres-scan work. If you are
    good with Photoshop or PSP, and selective as to which of your scans are
    worth spending time on, you can live without Digital Ice.

    Dennis.
     
    Dennis Pogson, Apr 26, 2007
    #5
  6. I have a Coolscan IV. It, and the ICE3, works, but a scanner with
    a diffuse light source would be much better to get rid of
    grain. Any suggestions?

    Doug McDonald
    a person getting tired of Photoshop's band-aid. I cut my
    mouse button finger and am currently crippled.
     
    Doug McDonald, Apr 26, 2007
    #6
  7. ZalekBloom

    gerrit Guest

    My Epson 4490 has Digital Ice and is not excessively expensive. As you said,
    for screen work it is fine. I even did some colour slides for a printed
    book. Took a bit longer but still impressive for the price of the machine.

    Gerrit - Oz
     
    gerrit, Apr 26, 2007
    #7
  8. ZalekBloom

    Ron Recer Guest

    We have a Canon 8600 and it seems to do a good job on 35mm slides. Takes
    about 30 minutes to scan 4 slides.

    Ron
     
    Ron Recer, Apr 26, 2007
    #8
  9. ZalekBloom

    DBLEXPOSURE Guest

    Patrick Ziegler ImageQuest Photography
    I have a Minolta DiMAGE Scan Dual4 that I do not use anymore, I would let
    it go cheap.


    PZ
    www.imagequest.ifp3.com
     
    DBLEXPOSURE, Apr 26, 2007
    #9
  10. I've never liked diffuse light sources; always used a condenser enlarger
    in the darkroom, too. You can use GEM, or Noise Ninja or NeatImage, to
    get rid of grain you don't want easily enough.
     
    David Dyer-Bennet, Apr 26, 2007
    #10
  11. ZalekBloom

    Harry Palmer Guest

    how much and where are you?
    Hp
     
    Harry Palmer, Apr 26, 2007
    #11
  12. ZalekBloom

    jeremy Guest

    I'd second that recommendation. Even my newly-developed film often has
    scratches that must be cleaned up. If it were not for ICE3 I would have
    abandoned film scanning.
    I have the PrimeFilm PF3650Pro3, but I notice that it has been removed from
    both the Amazon site and from the manufacturer's site (www.scanace.com).
    I'm wondering if it has been withdrawn? It has Digital ICE3, it scans an
    entire roll of uncut negatives (so I can just let it scan automatically
    while I do something else), it scans individual slides, and it has 3600
    optical resolution, which is more than the original Kokak "Photo CD" had
    (2048 x 3072).

    There is a full review here:

    http://www2.hardwarezone.com/articles/view.php?cid=13&id=868

    If anyone is looking for the best bang for the buck, they might want to
    check around and snap one of these up if they're still in the shops. I paid
    about $350.00 on Amazon.com for mine.
     
    jeremy, Apr 26, 2007
    #12
  13. I've recently tried the Photoshop Plug-in 2.0 version of Kodak GEM and
    I it might be the best grain reduction solution (at least on the
    software side) that I've tried so far. I've also got GEM in my scanner
    software (Konica-Minolta Scan Elite 5400 II) but it doesn't really do
    much in my opinion. I've also tried Photoshop plug-ins Remove Grain 2,
    Noise Ninja, Neat Image and possibly one or two more that I can't
    remember.

    On my dual-core machine, the GEM Plugin is very fast too, at least
    compared to the Remove Grain 2 plug-in. I think it has a good
    trade-off between grain reduction and detail preservation and
    is fine-tunable. I've only tried the demo on a few images but
    so far it's very promising.

    I've also heard about a separate scanning aid called Scanhancer but
    haven't tried that.
     
    Toni Nikkanen, Apr 26, 2007
    #13
  14. That resolution (if taken literally) is adequate for nearly anything
    (certainly unless you have slides shot on very lowspeed films, on a
    tripod, with first-rate lenses :)).

    The entire uncut roll thing sounds *so great* -- except that all the
    film I need to scan is already cut into strips of 1, 4, 5, or 6 frames.
    (The "1" is mounted slides, and I do have the slide feeder for my
    Nikon Coolscan 5000 ED).

    Also, the rare times I've had films returned uncut, it's been *much*
    more scratched up, probably from what they did to get the entire strip
    into a protective plastic sleeve, or else what they did to coil it up in
    the film can. So I don't think I'd have film returned uncut even if I
    were still shooting film. If I were processing it myself I'd probably
    scan it before cutting, though, if I had such a scanner.
     
    David Dyer-Bennet, Apr 26, 2007
    #14
  15. ZalekBloom

    DBLEXPOSURE Guest

    Patrick Ziegler ImageQuest Photography
    Right now I am a deployed Soldier but I wll be home to South Dakota in six
    weeks or so. Price is Make an offer, I really don't use it anymore. It
    does have one quirk I need to disclose, From time to time the tractor feed
    sticks, all you need to do is give it a tap and it will then advance to the
    next slide. But, you cannot leave it un attended when doing a batch of six.
    You have to unstick it when it gets hung up or it will just sit and grind
    away.

    With that in mind and if you can wait until I get home, I am thinking in
    the $200 ball park.

    PZ
    www.imagequest.ifp3.com
     
    DBLEXPOSURE, Apr 26, 2007
    #15
  16. ZalekBloom

    Harry Palmer Guest

    It's a good price but I'll pass, I really need the thing now. I'm going to
    buy the coolscan this weekend. I saw the one that you have go on ebay for
    about $250+ so I'd sell it there if I were you. Good to hear you are coming
    home and thanks for looking out for us.

    Harry
     
    Harry Palmer, Apr 26, 2007
    #16
  17. ZalekBloom

    DBLEXPOSURE Guest

    Thanks harry, Appreciate hearing that,

    I am not looking to move the scanner, I simply don't use it much so if
    anyone needs one and get use out of it, the deal stands.

    Good luck with your Coolscan.


    Patrick Ziegler ImageQuest Photography
     
    DBLEXPOSURE, Apr 26, 2007
    #17
  18. ZalekBloom

    jeremy Guest

    I have my film returned uncut so I can avoid having to stay with the scanner
    and keep on inserting strips.

    The first pass is pre-scan. That takes about 1 minute per frame. I can
    walk away and come back in half an hour, then select the images I want to
    have fully-scanned, I can rotate any of them that require it and I can turn
    on ICE3/ROC/GEM. Then the full scanning process begins. I can walk away
    again, for about 2 hours, and the roll is done.

    The ability to scan an entire roll makes the long scan time acceptable.
     
    jeremy, Apr 27, 2007
    #18
  19. ZalekBloom

    Alan Browne Guest

    If you're going to the trouble to scan a negative you might as well get
    a reasonably good scanner so that you can print if desired. IOW avoid
    the flatbed scanners and go for a dedicated film scanner. 3000 - 4000
    dpi scan resolution is enough but look for first version (not the "II")
    of the Minolta 5400 as well which can be had used for about 250 - 400$.
    The only two brands that I would recommend for reliabilty and support
    are Nikon and the Minolta. Canon: maybe. They screwed up earlier film
    scanners with a noisy power supply so they lost a lot of trust. There
    are others as well, just less well known.

    Minolta are of course out of this business now and Sony's position in
    film scanners is not clear.

    Get ICE if you can. Here is why: (mouse over the image).
    http://www.aliasimages.com/ScanScratch.htm also works wonders on dust.
    With edits, archiving and so on I average 15 minutes per frame using the
    Minolta 5400. 30 minutes using the Nikon 9000ED, but that's for other
    reasons.

    If you're less fussy, you can knock down about 10 per hour once you have
    your "routine" down (scanning while editing).

    Nikon V,
    Nikon 5000 (pricey).

    Used. Minolta 5400 (not -II), Minolta Dimage Scan Dual II, III.

    I'd avoid Canon even though they probably fixed their problems.

    Don't do flatbed. (The flatbed guys will howl, so what).

    Cheers,
    Alan
     
    Alan Browne, Apr 29, 2007
    #19
  20. ZalekBloom

    DBLEXPOSURE Guest

    Why not a flatbed? Here are a couple flatbeds from Epson that have good and
    great resolution, come with Digital Ice, have good Dmax specs and can scan
    not only negs and slides but will handle prints and medium and large format
    negs if you like.



    4800dpi http://tinyurl.com/27xt9t

    6400 dpi http://tinyurl.com/2or38c



    PZ



    www.Imagequest.ifp3.com






    Patrick Ziegler ImageQuest Photography
     
    DBLEXPOSURE, Apr 29, 2007
    #20
    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.