Numpti scanning question

[Julian Elliott]

Evening all

Now, when it comes to scanning images I will admit I know diddly squat!

The only scanner here in the house is just a combined scanner/ printer that my missus uses when she needs stuff for work. It's just an HP flatbed scanner.

So, do you HAVE to have a dedicated film scanner just to get an idea of your film looks like? I know that there are dedicated photo scanners by people such as Epson and Nikon.

Anyone?

Thanks !!!!!!

Jools

[Joanna Carter]

Well, you definitely need a transparency head to shine light through the film The "standard" that a lot of people go with is the Epson V700. (other scanners are available )

Or, you could simply hold the film against a backlit piece of greaseproof paper and take a shot with a digital camera.

[Julian Elliott]

Well, I could do that with my 35mm stuff. I'm thinking of my 6x6 stuff.

So, essentially what you are saying Joanna is get a slide scanner!

[Paul Mitchell]

Yes, IMHO you do need either a dedicated film scanner or a high end flatbed for scanning transparencies and it really is a case of 'you get what you pay for...'

I use a Nikon Coolscan 9000ED for all my MF, it really is the dogs dangly bits. The downside is they're as rare as rocking horse poo (Nikon discontinued them last year) and, even 2nd hand, they command about £2.5K.

I also have the Epson V700 which, while not being able to match the quality of a drum scanner, is excellent for all my LF. I've never used it for my MF transparencies but have heard good reports. The Epson 4990's are also supposed to be very good and can be picked up for about £250

Paul

[Paul Dunning]

From what I've seen the affordable dedicated slide scanners don't do 4x5 (not sure about 6x6) unless you go for something very expensive like an Imacon, a good quality flatbed with transparency unit like the Epson V700 will stand you in good stead for 135, 120 and 4x5 transparencies.

Paul.

[dave_whatever]

If your scanner isn't transparency capable you could try the old trick of using a lightbox turned upside down and using that as an improvised transparency lid.

[Neil Barnes]

If you can find one - they haven't been made for years - the Epson Photo Perfection 2450 does 4*5 negatives and slides.

Neil

[Joanna Carter]

You're more likely to find either a 4870 or a 4990, both of which are better than the 2450 and can be found for reasonable prices.

[dennis]

I use an Epson 4990 for scanning from 35mm to 8x10 & it seems to function OK. That said I cannot compare my scans with others, but see the 8x10 - 'First 8x10 neg' post in Critique forum. I use 4000 dpi for 35mm, 1400 for 6x7, 1100 for 6x12 & 1000 for 4x5 & 8x10, the latter takes a little time. Comments welcomed. Dennis.

[Joanna Carter]

I certainly didn't find any significant difference in scanning quality by "upgrading" to a V700 from a 4870. I still have a couple of "stonking" 40" x 32" prints from scans on the 4870.

[Julian Elliott]

Thanks for this folks!

I see a few 4870s going on Ebay at reasonable prices. However, what worries me a little is software issues going forward. Will the drivers still work on Windows if I happen to get a new PC in a year or two etc.

[Joanna Carter]

… what worries me a little is software issues going forward. Will the drivers still work on Windows if I happen to get a new PC in a year or two etc.

This is always a concern when buying older hardware, especially with Windows.

There are a couple of considerations that can provide solutions to such possibilities:

1. On Windows, you can install something like VMWare, which allows you to create virtual machines with older versions of the operating system as "guests". This allows you to have, for example, a Windows 7 machine as the "host" and Windows XP, or even older versions as "guests". At the moment, Epson does still support running the 4870 under Windows 7 32 and 64 bit.

2. I know it is more expensive to buy a Mac but, in the end, their support for plug in hardware, like cameras, scanners and printers, has always been somewhat more comprehensive than Windows. I have found that most digital cameras will plug straight into a Mac and allow transfer of images without needing any of the camera manufacturer's additional software normally needed for Windows. It has also, traditionally, support the use of 32-bit equipment drivers on a 64-bit operating system without the same problems that Windows can have in that respect.

[Tony]

… what worries me a little is software issues going forward. Will the drivers still work on Windows if I happen to get a new PC in a year or two etc.

This is always a concern when buying older hardware, especially with Windows.

There are a couple of considerations that can provide solutions to such possibilities:

1. On Windows, you can install something like VMWare, which allows you to create virtual machines with older versions of the operating system as "guests". This allows you to have, for example, a Windows 7 machine as the "host" and Windows XP, or even older versions as "guests". At the moment, Epson does still support running the 4870 under Windows 7 32 and 64 bit.

Hi Joanna I have an epson 4870 and it runs fine on my windows 7 64 bit machine !
Tony

[Neil Barnes]

<cough> Linux </cough>

The Sane and XSane packages have drivers for just about everything there is. It's occasionally the most modern stuff that lacks drivers, since often the manufacturers won't play ball and it takes time for them to be reverse engineered.

Good call on the 4870 - there's one just up the road from me I have my eye on, collection only. My 2450 is getting a little tired...

Neil

p.s. I run W2K on a virtual machine under my 64-bit linux. Confuses my boss no end!

[Joanna Carter]

<cough> Linux </cough>

I'd get that throat looked at if I were you

I run W2K on a virtual machine under my 64-bit linux. Confuses my boss no end!

Heheheh. You'd should've seen the looks on my clients' faces when I went to discuss Windows development with a MacBook Pro in hand