Jump to content

Plustek 8200i and vuescan


Robert M Poole

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello, after shooting digital for a few years I got the hankering to revisit the silver side and shoot some film. I have developed one roll of tri-x 400 so far and hope to shoot some more soon. My question is, does anyone have any advice on using vuescan for tri-x 400? The scans I've been getting are OK but I want to isolate variables which are many at there moment:

The film

My shooting skills (still learning, aren't we all?)

My developing (compete novice)

Scanning (novice again)

 

Thanks in advance, pics to follow :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not being very helpful, Robert, but I'm in a similar boat. I'm rattling off films but, not overly impressed with the scan results were from a local shop (negatives look OK), I figure it's time to get a scanner. I was thinking of getting a Plustek 120, to leave the path open to a return to MF, but the 8200 looks like a lot better value for money, and I could always scan MF with a flatbed (8200 plus an Epson 850 is still cheaper than the 120). Whatever I get, it has to be imported, as none of the above are available in stock here.

 

My guess at this stage is 8200 with the stock Silverfast (only shooting B&W film). If Silverfast is unworkable, I'll try Vuescan.

 

If you go ahead with your plan, let us know how it works out.

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Vuescan is the software I use and the film presets are somewhat spurious and should be ignored because film, exposures, and the amounts of light and dark in a photo are variable. It's been said many times before but I'll say it again anyway, the very best scan you can do is a generic low contrast horrible looking image that simply contains each end of the histogram. Then you make it Tri-X or whatever in post processing. Do not try to make the photograph look like anything special at the scanning stage. So you do the basics of setting dpi, TIFF output, choose a generic film type, no sharpening or ICE clean-up, and have the white and black points set to zero or very near zero. If you've not already fiddled with anything else that should be it, although I will have forgotten something. Do the Preview scan and adjust brightness to suite, keeping an eye on the histogram, and the press Scan.

 

Steve

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

EoinC - is that image a scan from film? If it is then it's far better than what I am getting. Even FP4 scanned looks horrible with grain like a 1600 ISO film. I  can't understand what I'm doing wrong or what setting I have wrong on my Reflecta and Silverfast as previously on my old Coolscan even pushed TRI-X looked very nice.

Hi, Paul. Yes, it's a scan of Agfa APX 100, but scanned at a shop - I don't know what on. I asked for TIFF's, but received JPEG's, and there was a very wide range of quality of scan across the 4 films I gave them (2x APX 100 & 2x Pan 100). The scans have quite different yellow and blue channels in the LR histogram. Steve's approach is what I would expect (scan to capture as much tonal range and content data as possible) - The scan should not be the post-processing. I want to get a scanner so that I can control this step, but am still undecided on which.

This is on Ilford Pan 100, the scans of which were very blotchy in the highlights:

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites

i am using vuescan with 8200i, here are a couple of slides from 1972 (street in the Bronx where I grew up and my parents looking very very young) --

 

 

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites

oops .... forgot to add to it ....

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry that wasn't it (Though it was from same period) ...

 

 

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites

here is one more that was particularly difficult, but seems to work -- anyone have a good way to clean dust/etc off of slides BEFORE scanning?

 

Love the old photos, Steve.

My workflow, which I have found to eliminate most of the dust, is to wipe the negative strip with the Ilford antistatic cloth (credit to Keith H for suggesting this to me a while ago) and then after it is in the film carrier carefully (not too close, but not too far away) shoot a few bursts of air from the Falcon dust off.

 

Here are the links to B&H...

 

 

Ilford Antistaticum Anti-Static Cloth - 13 x 13"

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/24592-REG/Ilford_1203547_Antistaticum_Anti_Static_Cloth.html

 

 

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/17499-REG/Falcon_FGS_Dust_Off_Kit_with_Chrome.html

Falcon Dust-Off Kit with Chrome Nozzle (100% Ozone Safe)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Vuescan is the software I use and the film presets are somewhat spurious and should be ignored because film, exposures, and the amounts of light and dark in a photo are variable. It's been said many times before but I'll say it again anyway, the very best scan you can do is a generic low contrast horrible looking image that simply contains each end of the histogram. Then you make it Tri-X or whatever in post processing. Do not try to make the photograph look like anything special at the scanning stage. So you do the basics of setting dpi, TIFF output, choose a generic film type, no sharpening or ICE clean-up, and have the white and black points set to zero or very near zero. If you've not already fiddled with anything else that should be it, although I will have forgotten something. Do the Preview scan and adjust brightness to suite, keeping an eye on the histogram, and the press Scan.

 

Steve

 

Robert - I am afraid that there is no silver bullet and Steve's advice is really the best.  The at-home scanning process is heavily dependent on post-scanning digital "dodging and burning."  Just like an analog "work print" is not going look as good as it can (and will likely lack contrast in the right areas and will appear flat), it provides a baseline from which to formulate the particular dodging and burning rendition that you want.  A flat scan will provide a baseline for the infinite number of digital D&B renditions that are possible.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Eoinc,Robert and Steve , your scan are fine for me.

 

As said Steve (250wb) I also work in Tiff , never in Jpeg (equiv. DNG in digital)

For dust to be removed before scanning I use this profes. compressor Kaiser

(520 Euros). I also use this comp. when I work with my enlarger. 

The spray gun is very practical

 

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!

 

but less expensive you can purchase this one here :

http://www.amazon.fr/RevolutionAir-425005-Miny-Compresseur-portatif/dp/B0052WQGTK/ref=sr_1_1?s=hi&ie=UTF8&qid=1451810102&sr=1-1

You can also use it for another work (inflate bike tire....)

Best

Henry

Link to post
Share on other sites

I should have added that Vuescan turns them into TIFF files about 20mb in size (for 11x17). This is the same size TIFF files I get back now from the developer when I shoot film. There is no need, on my end, to get into a more expensive work flow. This is just about getting a really good digitized picture from old slides and negatives (color and BW). I can always take the original to a printer to get a big wet print made -- no need for the digital interface for that.  And as I wrote elsewhere, the Plustek has one big advantage -- it is currently being manufactured.

Link to post
Share on other sites

John Henderson gets some very nice scans with his 7600 which is basically a 8200. He uses vuescan, and I suspect he uses Silver Efex 2. Maybe he'll happen along and tell us.

Pete

 

Yes, as Pete says, I use the 7600i which has the SAME IQ as the 8200i - basically you are paying extra money for a different colour plastic on the scanner and Silverfast 8.  Vuescan is easier to use and equally as good, if not better.  I clip for the black point, lock the exposure, and then scan as flat as I can without using any of the film emulations (which are all useless anyway).  I then adjust in LR and a little in SilverEfex, if needed (but generally I can make most adjustments quite quickly in LR).  You can check some of the sans out on my blog by clicking here.

 

The price difference between the 7600i and the 8200 can be as much as 50%.  I use Vuescan because it is much cheaper than Silverfast - and it comes with a lifetime of free updates and you can use it across any scanner (unlike Silverfast, where you have to pay each time for other scanners).

 

John 

Link to post
Share on other sites

and the difference between the 8200 and 120 is that the 120 can scan 120 and 35mm ..... i enjoy my 8200, no complaints, and use it with vuescan. silverfast is just a mess, and this is coming from someone who works on computer and uses all sorts of software packages everyday. i want to scan and have some nice digitized versions of old slides/negatives but can't spend my life doing it -- i still have a day job.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...