Recommendation on negative scanner

[tjxism]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, dimm said:

 

 

 

Ok, I tried this workflow. It works, but it has few downsides:

1. Almost all SilverFast editing abilities are disabled if scan in 16 bit HDR mode. No scratch and dust removal and no film select. As a result I get negative which requires much more work afterwards.

2. Negative Lab Pro doesn't have film selection and much more primitive controls 

3. Even after inverting negative to positive all controls in Lightroom continue to work as if I still working in negative - in other words all sliders are inverted. So, if I want to lower exposition I should move slider right. It drives me crazy

There’s no way to get “positive” DNG if your film is negative. The idea of any raw format is to get an unprocessed file as your camera/scanner “sees“ it. If you definitely want the scanner’s dust and scratch removal, you can scan to TIFF. It’s good enough for minor edit. 
 

As for NLP, it provides more than sufficient adjustment for converting from negative to positive. Better than most photo lab can do for you. If you want to do further creative edit in Lightroom, tick “make a tiff copy” and edit on the tiff copy. Also you can generate multiple tiff copies with different NLP settings. Do not edit on the negative DNG file as the results will be unpredictable. 

Edited February 15, 2020 by tjxism

[dimm]

14 minutes ago, tjxism said:

There’s no way to get “positive” DNG if your film is negative. The idea of any raw format is to get an unprocessed file as your camera/scanner “sees“ it. If you definitely want the scanner’s dust and scratch removal, you can scan to TIFF. It’s good enough for minor edit. 

Let's take for example digital camera. I press shutter - I get digital "positive" in DNG format. Why I cannot get the same when I scan my negative?

 

17 minutes ago, tjxism said:

As for NLP, it provides more than sufficient adjustment for converting from negative to positive. Better than most photo lab can do for you. If you want to do further creative edit in Lightroom, tick “make a tiff copy” and edit on the tiff copy. Also you can generate multiple tiff copies with different NLP settings. Do not edit on the negative DNG file as the results will be unpredictable. 

For color - maybe. Although It doesn't display levels or curves, but nevermind. I shot mainly B&W. And NLP even doesn't bother to change color sliders when I select B&W. It actually allows me to change colors on B&W! 

[tjxism]

5 hours ago, dimm said:

Let's take for example digital camera. I press shutter - I get digital "positive" in DNG format. Why I cannot get the same when I scan my negative?

Because when you shoot, the camera sees a positive world. When you scan, the camera sees a negative film!

 

As for B&W, you need to understand although you have a B&W film, you still only get a color raw file as your camera/scan has a color sensor, just like you can’t see the world in B&W. You can ignore the color settings in NLP but I think it’s fine to include them as people may need to adjust white balance or add color cast to the result. NLP is trying to simulate the workflow of the lab scanner and also maintain a Raw file so you can generate different versions later. 

[dimm]

3 hours ago, tjxism said:

Because when you shoot, the camera sees a positive world. When you scan, the camera sees a negative film!

 

As for B&W, you need to understand although you have a B&W film, you still only get a color raw file as your camera/scan has a color sensor, just like you can’t see the world in B&W. You can ignore the color settings in NLP but I think it’s fine to include them as people may need to adjust white balance or add color cast to the result. NLP is trying to simulate the workflow of the lab scanner and also maintain a Raw file so you can generate different versions later. 

 

Ok, I understand, thank you. So, basically, I need scan as DNG in order to save myself from need to rescan negatives later in case I need. It actually encapsulates scan process itself.

And I need and NLP software in order to convert those DNGs to TIFF in order to edit them or share to social media

[gabrielaszalos]

Seems like it's really hard to conclude what a good scanner is. I'd be slightly afraid to buy a second-hand Nikon Coolscan which may or may not work and may or may not need servicing soon, and may or may not work with modern operating systems...

I hope someone makes an affordable scanner soon and I don't have to buy a full-frame DSLR camera just for that. /sigh

[250swb]

1 hour ago, gabrielaszalos said:

I hope someone makes an affordable scanner soon and I don't have to buy a full-frame DSLR camera just for that. /sigh

Any of the Plustek scanners are ideal for scanning 35mm, as good as a Coolscan and far better than any flatbed.

All the different model designations are essentially the same scanner differentiated by the bundled version of the Silverfast software (except the Plustek 120 which is also a medium format scanner). So buying one generation back (so 7000 series instead of 8000 series) gets you a much cheaper discounted scanner, they get a cheap subscription to Vuescan and don't use the bundled Silverfast software because it is awful. 

Scanning is a new learning curve, nothing is likely to come to you intuitively or even just by following the instructions, but when you get in the zone you can have a good evening scanning and justifiably think you've done a good job.

[gabrielaszalos]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 minutes ago, 250swb said:

Any of the Plustek scanners are ideal for scanning 35mm, as good as a Coolscan and far better than any flatbed.

 

Are you sure about this? Comparison images I see online show that the Plustek gets considerably less quality and detail than the Coolscan. Frankly, I do not care much for the software, I just need to get the raw scan and I can use Photoshop just fine. 

[250swb]

10 minutes ago, gabrielaszalos said:

Are you sure about this? Comparison images I see online show that the Plustek gets considerably less quality and detail than the Coolscan. Frankly, I do not care much for the software, I just need to get the raw scan and I can use Photoshop just fine. 

Well go by the comparison images then, but just ensure the sites you are looking at aren't comparing apples with oranges, mistaking digital noise with resolution, or simply believing that the highest available resolution isn't interpolated.

[gabrielaszalos]

5 minutes ago, 250swb said:

Well go by the comparison images then, but just ensure the sites you are looking at aren't comparing apples with oranges, mistaking digital noise with resolution, or simply believing that the highest available resolution isn't interpolated.

You're right. I suspect the same. Just trying to get to the bottom of it. I really don't care about Silverfast performance, I only care about the actual hardware performance of a scanner and the raw image it can extract. Processing those images should not be included in scanner reviews in my humble opinion. I don't want to go by comparison images (unless they are both 100% raw without any software modifications), what you are saying is interesting, so do clarify... The Plustek 135 seems interesting...

Edited February 18, 2020 by gabrielaszalos

[plasticman]

2 hours ago, 250swb said:

Well go by the comparison images then, but just ensure the sites you are looking at aren't comparing apples with oranges, mistaking digital noise with resolution, or simply believing that the highest available resolution isn't interpolated.

Hang on there - I was gonna back you up until I saw this. The Coolscan 4000dpi resolution isn’t interpolated, and the image sharpness isn’t digital noise either.

There’s no need for you to malign a perfectly good scanner just because you don’t have one yourself. 

Would I buy a used Coolscan now? Not at the prices people seem to be asking for them on eBay and elsewhere these days. But reputable dealers like Ffordes have had reasonably priced models pretty recently. 

Otherwise any of the other scanners are good enough, and digital camera capture has the advantage of giving you an actual camera to carry around. I’ve been wondering what scanning with a used X1D would be like (and what lens could be used)?

Anyways - like I said, all good tools. Let’s not let sour grapes interfere with our judgement. 

Edited February 18, 2020 by plasticman

[Stealth3kpl]

Just to give you an idea. This is the Plustek 8100. You can pick one up for less than £200 new. I don't scan on full resolution, but the file properties of the scan this crop comes from tells me 9000x6000 at 240dpi what ever that means.

Tmax400 in Perceptol

 

 

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!

[Stealth3kpl]

The full photo (Vuescan).

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!

[Stealth3kpl]

You don't need an expensive scanner. You do need to learn how to use your scanner to your satisfaction. If you take a photo you'd like to print, you can send it out to scan.

Pete

[250swb]

24 minutes ago, plasticman said:

Hang on there - I was gonna back you up until I saw this. The Coolscan 4000dpi resolution isn’t interpolated, and the image sharpness isn’t digital noise either.

 

And I have a Plustek 120 that can do 5300 native dpi, and the difference is like.... minimal. It's like people believing that a '32mp camera sensor(should there be one)' is twice as good as a 16mp sensor, which it isn't.

[ChicagoMatthew]

I have a Pakon 135 and it will scan an entire roll in 5 mins on medium resolution or 11 mins on full it’s amazing and suuuuuper simple to use. If you have a lot of film to scan it’s worth the expense for your time. It only does 35mm though. 

[Stealth3kpl]

4 minutes ago, ChicagoMatthew said:

I have a Pakon 135 and it will scan an entire roll in 5 mins on medium resolution or 11 mins on full it’s amazing and suuuuuper simple to use. If you have a lot of film to scan it’s worth the expense for your time. It only does 35mm though. 

I have one too and I agree. I bought mine for $225 but people ask $1000+ nowadays. I would normally think that is a lot for a scanner but I don't suppose anyone thinks that when they're post processing frame 25 on their third roll of a batch of twelve 36 exposure films 😅

Pete

[plasticman]

7 hours ago, 250swb said:

And I have a Plustek 120 that can do 5300 native dpi, and the difference is like.... minimal. It's like people believing that a '32mp camera sensor(should there be one)' is twice as good as a 16mp sensor, which it isn't.

Exactly - it's not about "native dpi" - there are differences in optics and focussing as well.

But most of all, Pete's amazing scan above shows it's not about the scanner at all: it's the workman not the tool.

[gabrielaszalos]

Does anyone have experience or thoughts about the Plustek Opticfilm 135? I wish the 120 was still available because it allows 12 frames at a time. 

[Stealth3kpl]

24 minutes ago, gabrielaszalos said:

Does anyone have experience or thoughts about the Plustek Opticfilm 135? I wish the 120 was still available because it allows 12 frames at a time. 

I hadn't seen it before but I think I would consider it having watched this video. It has 6 frame batch scanning and what looks to be effective negative conversion software with a simple looking interface. However, see the conclusion here. In the main it may be fine for most images but you may wish to send out to scan a really good image

Pete

Edited February 22, 2020 by Stealth3kpl

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[harmen]

I’ve been very happy with my 135.  I have little to compare it with except the Fuji from my local lab.  It seems to be on par.  Certainly convenient with the batch scanning.  I do not miss infrared as I scan right after developing  and never have dust.  I do use vuescan as the software that is included doesn’t reach the same quality.