andybarton Posted November 30, 2009 Share #21 Posted November 30, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Where is this Leica gallery? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 30, 2009 Posted November 30, 2009 Hi andybarton, Take a look here What 35mm film scanner to buy?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
marke Posted November 30, 2009 Share #22 Posted November 30, 2009 The CoolScan 4000 and 5000 both can do roll scans, there is a link in the above blog post to a hack, basically inserting a piece of wire into the backside plug which will let it do full rolls rather than the 6 frame it is born with. . Wow, I didn't know this! I had read your article before, but somehow just missed this. One question, Bo. Don't you need some kind of holder to secure and position the film properly as it feeds through the scanner? Thanks for sharing this tip. I hope to pick up a Nikon to replace my plustek 7200 as soon as I can afford it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bo_Lorentzen Posted November 30, 2009 Share #23 Posted November 30, 2009 Mark, The only thing you need is a bucket to catch the film on the other side. I would get a 2-4inch acrylic tube and set it on the floor and cut a hole to let it catch the film in a closed environment, the round tube will prevent the center of the film from ever touching (scratching). but you can just have a cardboard box also. Enjoy. . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Istar Posted November 30, 2009 Share #24 Posted November 30, 2009 You better hurry: Nikon is also dropping its 9000! I have both the 2000 and the 9000 The latter is the only decent scannner for Kodachrome (and have a few thousand of those...) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Rawcs Posted December 1, 2009 Share #25 Posted December 1, 2009 I must admit I'm pretty confused by scanning. I have a Minolta Scan Elite scanner and the instruction that came with it are pretty minimal. It will scan at 8 or 16 bit colour and multi scan at 4, 8, or 16 times. I use a Leica, so obviously I want the best result, so I scan a colour neg at 16 bit colour and 16 times multi scan. When I view the the results in Photoshop using actual pixels to spot the photograph I can see every pixel. I also get something like an almost-300 mp file and a scan time of around 25-30 minutes per (Tiff) photograph. I have no idea if I need such a large file. I don't know what file size will produce what photograph size on a current printer. I do know that I don't want to have to scan and spot a photograph again once scanned: hence the temptation to scan at maximum. Does anyone know what Mp file produces what size photograph? I suppose 16 x 12 will be the largest photograph that I will need - maybe 20 x 24. Mike. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Rawcs Posted December 1, 2009 Share #26 Posted December 1, 2009 With regard to which scanner to buy. My Minolta start-up box shows that the copyright is for 2002 - 2003 with portions to Sunsoft Inc for 1994 - 1998!! You have to wonder how long these machines will continue to work without buying new software from Vuescan or Silverfast. Do these companies provide good instructions as to what file size produces what print size? One must wonder how the latest flatbed scanner fare compared to dedicated film scanners. In a thread on Lightstalkers titled "Film and Wet Darkroom Usage" one post mentions using an after-market film holder from Custom film holders for Agfa, Microtek, Canon and Epson film scanners. in his flatbed scanner. Apparently you can adjust the position of the film holder to ensure accurate focus. Has anyone tried the product? Flatbed scanning is tempting: the ability to scan 12 negs at a time must be a great time-saver. If the quality is good (great) enough. Mike. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeMyers Posted December 1, 2009 Author Share #27 Posted December 1, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) The above is both very informative and a bit confusing. It sounds like all those providing scanners are dropping out of the market... ...but when I go to BHPhotovideo.com and check on film scanners, there are many choices shown. I had no idea what I need, and still am rather confusabobbled, but I'm getting closer I think. As to quality, my goal is to either get "as good as my M8" or "as good as I could do with a film negative". I don't need a microscopic view showing each and every grain particle in full detail, but I want as good an image as the camera and lens is capable of taking. Why do I want all this? For two reasons, really. One is to digitize photos I've taken in the past, and the other is for when/if I might go somewhere with one of my old film Leicas (or a newer one) and shoot film. I have zero desire to build another darkroom, and even if I did, I need to get my pictures onto the 'web'. Whatever seems to be the best choice is what I'm likely to buy this coming February. How about this one: Pacific Image | PF7250U 35mm Film and Slide Scanner | PF7250U Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Rawcs Posted December 1, 2009 Share #28 Posted December 1, 2009 Mike, that looks like a re-branded Reflecta CrystalScan 7200. See Scandig site for a review. Mike. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nhabedi Posted December 1, 2009 Share #29 Posted December 1, 2009 ...but when I go to BHPhotovideo.com and check on film scanners, there are many choices shown. Many are likely re-branded versions of some other scanner, though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.