Jump to content

Recommendation on negative scanner

dimm

By dimm
in Leica M-A / M7 / MP and Film M

 Share

Recommended Posts

gabrielaszalos

gabrielaszalos

Posted
Posted (edited)

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am now considering getting a Canon Rebel T7 with the EF-S 60mm Macro lens. It amounts to around 800€ and with the Lomography Digitaliza I think it can bring out some amazing “scans”. Would be faster, and would also allow capturing the edges (or even sprockets) of the film which I find great value in. I would love to have my shots contain the black film frame like Cartier-Bresson’s photos. 

Edited by gabrielaszalos
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 189
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

UliWer
UliWer

The whole thread illustrates that a new dedicated film scanner is overdue by the company which is still producing cameras for film…

plasticman
plasticman

I'm a software developer - but thanks for the tip about where I should learn about "technology". Also thanks for the gratuitous insult about "re-evaluating" my "life choices": next time I'm readi

A miller
A miller

if you want to do it right within reason, get a Nikon Coolscan, preferably the 9000 as that would allow you to scan medium format as well.  It is a fantastic machine and all that most people ever need

Posted Images

Danlandoni

Danlandoni

Posted
Posted

On a Pakon F-135+. Scanning full roll of 36 frames at highest res in 4 min. 
 

Simply put, the files are grain level sharp and the colors are ALWAYS accurate with little to zero post processing. The files from the Pakon are precise, true to their corresponding film type, and have no digital noise from the line CCD sensor. This is the advantage of over say, a DSLR scan. Resolution isn’t everything. They up-res using photoshop just fine to double their 3000x2000 native resolution.  

heres some XPan scans. 
https://imgur.com/gallery/ULE64lw

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
dimm

dimm

Posted
  • Author
Posted
18 minutes ago, Danlandoni said:

On a Pakon F-135+. Scanning full roll of 36 frames at highest res in 4 min. 
 

Simply put, the files are grain level sharp and the colors are ALWAYS accurate with little to zero post processing. The files from the Pakon are precise, true to their corresponding film type, and have no digital noise from the line CCD sensor. This is the advantage of over say, a DSLR scan. Resolution isn’t everything. They up-res using photoshop just fine to double their 3000x2000 native resolution.  

heres some XPan scans. 
https://imgur.com/gallery/ULE64lw

 

What about B&W? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Danlandoni

Danlandoni

Posted
Posted

Both PSI and TLX (software that can run the Pakon) will scan BW and even color positive film with no problem. I’ve scanned probably 200 rolls of Tri-X in the past 3 years with it. I really wish someone will build a new Pakon so I don’t need a separate computer. It’s theoretically very simple compared to a flatbed scanner. In the meantime I run an old PC and just save files to a cloud so I can continue on my editing workstation or even on my iPad. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
david strachan

david strachan

Posted
Posted

Doesn't the high resolution just end up scanning grain at high resolution? That's why the files become huge. The effect makes the film look even more grainy.

Scans from my film processor, professional lab, come back about 5 Mb and look very grainy, even for low grain Ilford FP4+, my film of choice. It's their medium resolution scan and quite suitable for 8x10 printing.

 

I use my flatbed scanner (Canoscan 8800) and get less grain, and can still print a decent A4 print (8×10). It doesn't go crazy detailing grain.

I'd like to know.

Link to post
Share on other sites
convexferret

convexferret

Posted
Posted

High resolution scans will be less grainy as they properly resolve the grain. Most medium-resolution scanners make grain look larger due to grain aliasing (look it up). Low resolution scanners like the flatbeds tend to be don’t have enough resolution to even partially resolve the grain. They give soft, and therefore grain (and sharpness) -free images. All of these options may be good enough for on-screen or small prints.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
frame-it

frame-it

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, david strachan said:

Doesn't the high resolution just end up scanning grain at high resolution? That's why the files become huge. The effect makes the film look even more grainy.

Scans from my film processor, professional lab, come back about 5 Mb and look very grainy, even for low grain Ilford FP4+, my film of choice. It's their medium resolution scan and quite suitable for 8x10 printing.

 

I use my flatbed scanner (Canoscan 8800) and get less grain, and can still print a decent A4 print (8×10). It doesn't go crazy detailing grain.

I'd like to know.

https://wasteoffilm.com/blog/2017/4/23/scanner-comparison-pakon-f135-vs-epson-v600-photo-scanner

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
J.Nordvik

J.Nordvik

Posted
Posted
18 hours ago, david strachan said:

Doesn't the high resolution just end up scanning grain at high resolution? That's why the files become huge. The effect makes the film look even more grainy.

Scans from my film processor, professional lab, come back about 5 Mb and look very grainy, even for low grain Ilford FP4+, my film of choice. It's their medium resolution scan and quite suitable for 8x10 printing.

 

I use my flatbed scanner (Canoscan 8800) and get less grain, and can still print a decent A4 print (8×10). It doesn't go crazy detailing grain.

I'd like to know.

The difference between Nikon 9000 and the other Nikons is that 9000 uses LED light. This is why 9000 shows less grain than the other scanners.

Or so I have been told.

The problem is that the 9000 is very expensive and if you do not scan Kodachrome or medium format, a 4000 or 5000 makes more sense.

I have a Nikon 4000 and I am very satisfied with it, but it (and 9000) uses FireWire cables which is expensive to get to work on a modern computer. Better buy a 5000 that uses USB.

If you only scan B&W (not C-41) use a digital camera.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
J.Nordvik

J.Nordvik

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, tommonego@gmail.com said:

C-41 is doable photographing with a camera, just a question of if the fiddling with color balance is any faster than scanning. My setup has sharper results than my scanner, so I am still pursuing this.

I am talking about B&W C41 which work like a color C41 in a Nikon scanner. ICE will take care of scratches and dust.

Link to post
Share on other sites
J.Nordvik

J.Nordvik

Posted
Posted

5cm Summicron Collapsible + M3:

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!

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
J.Nordvik

J.Nordvik

Posted
Posted

A crop, both with Nikon 4000.

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!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
david strachan

david strachan

Posted
Posted

Amazing detail Mr Nordvik, using the collapsible Summicron...especially as it's an edge enlargement.

Your scanner has done a great job too.

I use same lens after clean and lubrication, with OUFRO, gives nice close up 1:4  and right through to infinity. It's my only Leica 50mm and I'm quite happy.

 

Just a note to say the collapsible is no slouch...and looks great too.🤣 

 

...

Link to post
Share on other sites
J.Nordvik

J.Nordvik

Posted
Posted

A nice lens, but I have sold 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!

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
105012

105012

Posted
Posted
On 2/27/2020 at 3:33 PM, dimm said:

What about B&W? 

Works fine: Pakon F-135+ scan of Tri-X.

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!

 

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
105012

105012

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, dimm said:

It scans B&W negative as a color and you should convert result Which had some color cast to b&w after, right?

There is a B/W button, I press that and turn off ICE, then scan. The result has a slight warm tone, I click one more button "Cool" to remove that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
105012

105012

Posted
Posted

Also, I use a modern Mac with Windows XP running in an emulator (VM). All works fine. I keep the XP VM with no internet connection (isolated) and share a folder from my Mac as a drive on XP, the software saves straight into the folder on my Mac. So no worries about viruses etc on the XP...

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 years later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...