Which scanner would you recommend?

[wlaidlaw]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Never having stuck my face between the lid and the bed while scanning, on the Epson V700, when you take off the reflective screen on the lid to scan film, which function is on which part. Does the lens/sensor remain in the bed as in reflective scanning, with a new light source coming on in the lid? Or is it the reverse with the light source remaining in the bed and a new lens/sensor array coming into play in the lid? Since you are supposed to scan with emulsion up, I am guessing it is the latter.

 

Wilson

[SJP]

Thanks for all the replies. I obviously scan through the film i.e. in transmissive mode. If you scan film the lamp in the hood is switched on and the lamp below is off (this is only for reflective mode scanning of documents etc.).

 

The lens scans from below in both cases, hency my question about the film orientation. If the emulsion is facing up then you scan through the film carrier and the images are in "normal" orientation. If you have the emulsion facing down, as I think should be the best method, then you get a mirror image. Easy enough to correct by clicking the appropriate button.

 

So the question remains, emulsion up as indicated by the slide holding tray,,or down with the emulsion closest to the scan (lens) head? Note this is also the way a slide is projected, emulsion forward directed towards the projection lens.

 

Maybe I will just try scanning emulsion down to see whether it makes a difference.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[SJP]

I have not got round to the inverse scanning yet, will report on that later, but I have a problem with the tint/toning of some old slides (not Leica I'm afraid, still hopefully of interest).

 

Attached are a size reduced, as scanned (tiff => smaller jpg), straight out of the box and what I can make of the color rendition with C1. Normally clicking auto white balance at least gets you close to the mark, also using the white cars in the background seems like an obvious candidate for the white balance "eyedropper". No such luck. The tint of the clouds is too green, the tarmac too purple, white balancing seems to be severely blowing highlights. Indeed, the overall quality is pretty abysmal (except the car of course). I tried color correction scan function of the Epson scanner, that did not really help either.

 

Anyway - any ideas? I fear that the development may have been incorrect, or the pigments have faded, or both. Main reason is that this are pictures of my mother just after my father died many years ago & would like to send something decent to my brothers.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[philipus]

Hi Stephen

I tried to correct a bit ColorPerfect but it was difficult. The "Touch Up" feature isn't as powerful as when one works with a negative TIFF. Then I tried in LAB (my favourite colour space) and it went better, though there's still a magenta case I think. It might be better with a bigger file with more colour info in it. What I did was inch the two sliders in each the A and B diagrams (using the arrows right-left and up-down) until it looked all right.

cheers

philip

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited May 21, 2012 by philipus

[erl]

SJP, I spent 30secs removing blue and adjusting levels to brighten the image. Lost a bit of cloud because of brightening, but considered seeing your mother more clearly is the important fact.

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

There is a bit of residual red, but I left it because it 'lifts' the car.

[250swb]

What about this? 'Auto Colour' in Photoshop, and a tweak of contrast and colour.

 

Steve

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[erl]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Steve, on my screen your 'fix' is definitely green! It (the screen) is due for calibration, but only by two weeks. I don't believe it is far off 'correct'.

[plasticman]

We sometimes possibly overlook the simplest tools: using the Curves panel in Photoshop and simply clicking the grey-point eyedropper on what looks to me should approximate a neutral grey (the tarmac), I got the version below, which on my work laptop (not the best monitor, naturally) looks ok as a starting point. The important thing is to set the eyedropper to sample a range of local values (at least an 11-pixel radius) otherwise individual pixel variation will give misleading results.

 

We're not doing the best job by re-saving a tiny jpeg, but with the tools I have on my home computer (ColorPerfect and Nik Viveza), getting this image much better with an additional few local adjustments wouldn't be too difficult imo.

 

PS: I meant to add that doing this sort of first adjustment is supposed to be a starting-point, not a destination. It takes a fraction of a second, and because it's a single step, can also easily be reversed.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[philipus]

I did my LAB Curves adjustment on my old aluminium Macbook which clearly doesn't have a particularly well calibrated screen. I should have done it on my ACD. Now, at work on an average ThinkVision, everyone's versions have various colour casts; mine's magentaish, Erl's red, Steve's green. Calibration, calibration, calibration

 

One can do a lot in Levels but I prefer Curves on colour images.

[erl]

Plasticman, your correction is the most neutral version. Just needs brightening to get tones of the subject more pleasing, which I am sure you realize.

[plasticman]

Plasticman, your correction is the most neutral version. Just needs brightening to get tones of the subject more pleasing, which I am sure you realize.

 

Thanks Erl - it wasn't me it was Photoshop.

 

I think this sort of image is an ideal candidate for tools like Nik Viveza when it comes to fine-tuning. On the Nik website they show all sorts of HDR-looking transformations, but the real strength of the plugin is simply that it handles extremely complex masks and selections with a simple click. I'd use that to lift the figure in the image without losing any other detail, and because the selections can be very individually tweaked, the skintones (for instance) can be treated totally separately to the hair or coat.

 

Anyway, it's really all about interpretations. I can sometimes leave a color-cast in my images simply because I like it that way (this is especially true of warm casts on 'summer' images), it's always an aesthetic choice, as well as what may be 'correct'.*

 

*PS: as you can see, there's a slight yellow cast to my version. That tends to be my personal preference.

Edited May 22, 2012 by plasticman

[250swb]

Steve, on my screen your 'fix' is definitely green! It (the screen) is due for calibration, but only by two weeks. I don't believe it is far off 'correct'.

 

Darn it, I deleted the post once because I posted the wrong attempt, and then I upload the wrong one again. Teach me to be confident I'd found the right file and not check. Here is the better one

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[SJP]

Dear all!

 

Many thanks for your kind advice & lessons. It shows that there is sufficient information still available to get quite a decent picture, which is a relief.

 

So my experiments will continue. Of course I will basing all the conversions on the original scanned tiff & saving to a new smaller jpg to keep file size under control. It is encouraging that even the small jgs posted here allow quite a bit of improvement.

[edwardtadros]

Never having stuck my face between the lid and the bed while scanning, on the Epson V700, when you take off the reflective screen on the lid to scan film, which function is on which part. Does the lens/sensor remain in the bed as in reflective scanning, with a new light source coming on in the lid? Or is it the reverse with the light source remaining in the bed and a new lens/sensor array coming into play in the lid? Since you are supposed to scan with emulsion up, I am guessing it is the latter.

 

Wilson

I've used a Minolta Dimage Scan Elite 5400 for about the last 5 years, it is very good. Is the Plustek as good?

[wlaidlaw]

I've used a Minolta Dimage Scan Elite 5400 for about the last 5 years, it is very good. Is the Plustek as good?

 

I would not know. As I say in my post, I am using an Epson V700

 

Wilson

[myshkine]

I've used a Minolta Dimage Scan Elite 5400 for about the last 5 years, it is very good. Is the Plustek as good?

 

You can find lots of information on the Plustek 7600 SE if you search "Plustek" in this Forum. There is a dedicated, very informative, thread, one of the longest running.

[Augost]

Greetings

 

my scanner is not designed for scanning negatives nor slides, plus the fact that it is now 13 years old. I would like to upload some of those photos on the Internet but unfortunately my scanner is definitely inadequite for the job... so which is the most suitable scanner out there?

 

Thank you all in advance

 

Pok

 

Get an Epson v500, V600 or v700.

 

All three are amazing scanners for film as well as photos, as there is a 35mm holder/mask, slide holder/mask and a 120 holder/mask included.

 

these three are amazing scanners, and even the cheap v500, has a high dpi number.

[wlaidlaw]

Get an Epson v500, V600 or v700.

 

All three are amazing scanners for film as well as photos, as there is a 35mm holder/mask, slide holder/mask and a 120 holder/mask included.

 

these three are amazing scanners, and even the cheap v500, has a high dpi number.

 

I should point out a weak point of these scanners (particularly the 700). The external mains transformer is too small and inadequately cooled for continuous use. I am now on my third one. The representative at Epson, recommended that when not in use, I should disconnect this transformer from the mains to keep it cool, as it was a known weak point. When the last one went, Epson UK had run out of spares and I had to wait 2 weeks for new ones to be delivered from the far east. I bought a Euro connector lead with an inline on/off switch. If I used it more, I would use a remote radio controlled power socket.

 

Wilson

[pop]

Aren't there any third party power adaptors available?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[wlaidlaw]

Aren't there any third party power adaptors available?

 

Pop,

 

The current Epson V700 PSU (#3) was a guarantee replacement for #2, which I had to buy, as #1 died a few weeks out of warranty. If I had realised they were a weak point, I would have pressed much harder for an ex-gratia replacement for the original failure. If #3 dies and I cannot wangle another free replacement out of Epson UK, I will probably buy a stabilised power supply from Maplins. I may alternatively be able to come up with something from some of the spare power supply bricks for dead laptops that I have tucked away in a cupboard, just in case they were needed at some time. The Epson needs 24V DC at 1.4A and uses a bog standard 8mm low voltage concentric plug, which is I think similar to what HP laptops use.

 

Wilson