10 years of flat bed scanner technology...any improvement

[Wayne]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am hoping for a straight forward, uncomplicated answer to a simple question pertaining to flat bed scanners......Specifically, Epson flat be scanners.

 

About ten years ago I purchased a medium quality flat bed scanner. I suppose it would be the, then, equivalent to the modern V600 model, i.e middle quality model. I realize that flat bed scanners are never going to give the results of a dedicated film scanner, but I use the flat bed for 6x6, 4.5x6, and 6x9.

 

Are the improvements made in the last 10 years, in flat bed scanner technology, significant to the degree that a new, medium quality, Epson scanner produces notably better scans than my 10 year-old scanner produces?.............The old unit still works as well as it did the day I purchased it. I want to avoid throwing good money after bad. 

 

Best regards,

[ramarren]

I've owned the Epson 2450 for a very long time. Somewhere about the middle of that time, I bought a V700 due to all the accolades being expressed about it. After two years, I handed the V700 off to a friend and went back to using the 2450 ... I just prefer its rendering qualities.

 

35mm is better scanned with a film scanner or with a copy setup using the Leica BEOON. Where the 2450 comes into its own is scanning 6x6 negatives ... the BEOON can do that too, but I can get a lot more pixels out of the 2450 at 2400 ppi if I need them.

[Advertisement]

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

[fotomas]

I'm afraid there is nearly no improvement. Compared my Epson V850 with an Epson V700 the results looks mostly identical. OK, you may save some energy with the V850 due to the LED-light, but that's it.
An friend uses an old Epson 4870 Photo scanner and that gives clearly better scans from film than the later V700/750/800/850.

Also I guess the professional flad-bed scanners like Cezanne or Scitex/Creo EverSmart are gone as far as I know. But in this case it's cheaper to get an Flextight anyway.

 

[Wayne]

Thanks for the quick responses. My present scanner (flat bed) is the Epson Perfection 4490. It sounds as though I should probably stick with it. I am using the included Epson software (upgraded recently.) maybe I should just look at improvement through better software.

 

For 35mm negatives I am using a fairly recently purchased PrimeFilm 7200. Software that was included with that scanner is Cyberview X. Maybe a software upgrade is warranted there as well.

 

I had never even considered the BEOON. I have the new M-D. It looks like it could be fun.

 

Thanks again.

Edited February 10, 2017 by Wayne

[Wayne]

How is the BEOON when it comes to mounting medium format negatives in a flat plane? Is it better than mounting in the standard mount hardware for the Epson scanners?

 

The frustrating thing about using the Epson flat bed....You can see that the curvature of the negative is going to cause degradation of the scan.

[TomB_tx]

Film scanning has continued declining over the period in question, so there hasn't been much incentive for companies to do research in this area, except perhaps to update models.

[friedeye]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Loved my V500 - but gave it to my son.  Have a V800 now - stupid holders with their clear plastic - I don't even know what they call them - holders? Flatteners? Dust collectors? I get almost (not quite as good) the same results as my V500, but have to scan at 6400 so it's twice as slow. 2-3 minutes a frame. Zzzzzzzzzzz.

 

And did I mention dusty? I spend twice as much time making sure everything is dust free before I scan - and still get a galaxy.  Software dust corrections are a joke. So...

 

Really disappointing. End of rant. 

[Doug A]

How is the BEOON when it comes to mounting medium format negatives in a flat plane? Is it better than mounting in the standard mount hardware for the Epson scanners?

 

The frustrating thing about using the Epson flat bed....You can see that the curvature of the negative is going to cause degradation of the scan.

 

The BEOON is designed to make 1:1, 1:1.5, 1:2 and 1:3 size copies of originals with a 1:1.5 aspect ratio. There are masks for the three smaller sizes. With no mask, the opening in the base is the 1:3 frame. When copying 24mm x 36mm negatives, the 1:1 mask holds the film very flat because the opening is exactly the size of the image. None of the other masks match any of the MF formats so they could not hold the film very flat. Even if they could, the copy would not be at one of the designed magnifications and the extension tubes would not be the right length.* I gave up on using the BEOON for MF.**

 

* I had the same issue using an APS-C sensor camera, rather than a full frame camera the BEOON is designed to work with. I finally found an adjustable extension tube that works.

 

** For the very few MF negatives that I scan I put them emulsion side down on the V700 glass with a piece of ANR glass on top and get pretty good results.

[chris_livsey]

 

The frustrating thing about using the Epson flat bed....You can see that the curvature of the negative is going to cause degradation of the scan.

 

As Doug says the answer is to scan on the scanner bed. I use museum glass as recommended in this scanner review which does highlight the rather minor differences between available scanners:

 

http://luminous-landscape.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/The-New-Epson-V850-Pro-Scanner-Final.pdf

 

Which does seem to be not behind the paywall.

[wlaidlaw]

I think the V700 is just fine, especially for big negatives and glass plates. Even for 35mm, I am not sure it is not the equal of my Plustek 7400 dedicated 35mm film scanner, although I suspect not as good as the later Nikon film scanners or the Hasselblad Imacon ones. I expect to be using the V700 quite a lot to scan the 70mm negatives from my recently acquired Graflex Combat Graphic, aka "The Texas Leica/Gulliver's Contax". The V700 works much better with Vuescan than Epson's standard software. I have to admit I have not as yet tried it with my recently acquired Silverfast 8 software as the V700 is down in France and I am currently in the UK. 

 

Wilson

Edited February 18, 2017 by wlaidlaw

[Wayne]

Thanks again for the information. I believe I am going to experiment with the Museum Glass on my present scanner. I am curious though..... The small holes in the plastic negative holders seem to be a referenc needed by the scanner software in order to locate the negatives for scanning, does it present a problem when the glass is used rather than the plastic film holders? I do not see any way to use the holders in conjunction with glass plates.

[Doug A]

You're exactly right. The holes in the negative holder identify the holder to the scanner so it can automatically locate the individual frames for batch scanning. They also tell the scanner to use the negative scanning lens rather than the flatbed scanning lens. The negative scanning lens expects the original to be raised above the glass platen by the height of the holder. The flatbed scanning lens expects the original to be down on the glass platen. I use ViewScan for the V700. When I scan MF I select "Transparency 8x10" rather than "Transparency" for the Input Mode. What I get in the Preview is a scan of the entire platen. I then crop it to an individual frame and Scan. I use a square of cardboard to make sure the film is square with the edge of the platen so I don't have to rotate the scan in post. (I remove the cardboard to do the scan.)

Edited February 18, 2017 by Doug A

[wlaidlaw]

You can buy Epson V series frames with anti-newton glass in them and the referencing pegs http://www.betterscanning.com/scanning/usinginsert.html . I may well need to buy this for scanning 70mm film, as the substrate is quite thick on this film and it curls up like a clock spring. My father used to leave his film after drying, between multiple sheets of blotting paper with a sheet of plate glass above and below the blotting paper, held down by old shop weights. This was then left in our central heating boiler room for a few days and the film was then pretty flat.