Jump to content

Film Scanners is there an in between?


ryee3

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Been considering a scanner primarily for 35 mm black and white and color.

 

Is there something coming out that is price wise and quality wise between the NIKON 9000 and a higher end IMACON scanner?

 

If not, should I save my pennies (lots of them) and get the IMACON?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are only scanning 35mm, you don't need the Nikon 9000. The Nikon LS5000 does 35mm and the 9000 does medium format. It's more awkward to use the 9000 for 35mm. You can batch scan with the 5000, too. Use Gepe or similar slide mounts to hold the film flat. If you get Silverfast's Lasersoft software for the 5000, you won't need anything else. You can scan with their HDR raw file output and get everything that's present in the negative or slide. If you scan Kodachrome, their Kodachrome target will give the best results.

 

Tina

 

Tina Manley

Link to post
Share on other sites

..... It's more awkward to use the 9000 for 35mm. You can batch scan with the 5000, too. Use Gepe or similar slide mounts to hold the film flat.....]

 

As Tina intimates; a problem with Nikon [and I have a 9000, and presume the film holders are the same-ish for both models] is the totally crap design of the film holders which cannot keep film flat. Nikon scanners are substantially cheaper than [horribly] over-priced Imacons, but whose very, very cheap to manufacture film holders keep film in a wrinkle free state as it traverses it's scanning arc ['Virtual Drum-Scan' = marketing bollocks].

 

People scanning to get the utmost out of Nikon 9000 are using a 'wet scan' process and claim very good results, others are 'customising' their film holders with an anti-Newton's Rings glass sandwich to keep their film flat. 35 mm film cut in to single images might make for fiddly storage problems, and placing in a 35 mm slide film holder will necessarily crop into your image. The Nikon [9000scanner at least] can give a very good scan as will an Imacon. Imacon used to hide unsharp masking in their scans even when the sharpening was set to 'off' - I don't know if they still do. Imacons are very easy to use, and Nikons are far better than their rubbishy film holders and scanning software would have us believe.

 

If I win the lottery I will buy an Imacon safe in the knowledge that I am being utterly ripped off, but knowing that there will not be issues of crinkled film when passing the scan. The damned shame is that the lousy designers who vandalised the Nikon scanning system with pathetic, plastic film holders had seemingly never been in a darkroom and used an enlarger - where keeping film flat during enlargement was sorted out years ago.

 

I can't give a recommendation, but hope some of this helps. The Coolscan 8000-9000 User Group on Yahoo is the place to go for help with either of these scanners, I believe they have a 5000 User Group too.

 

Good luck.

 

................ Chris

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have both the Nikon 8000 and 5000. I have modified my 8000 in a way that I can 'borrow' the film holder from one of my enlarger neg carriers and insert the two metal plates to sandwich the film, thus holding it as flat as the enlarger. I can fit a strip of 3 - 6x6cm film in the holder but must manually place each frame in the gate, as for the enlarger. Results are excellent. I use VueScan software. the only reason to have the 9000 is to scan medium format, although it is equipped to do 35mm as well.

 

The Nikon 5000 is the correct machine to use for 35mm and I have no problems with its handing of film in the normal manner. It is quite different from the 9000, and light years faster, and cheaper.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The Nikon 5000 is the correct machine to use for 35mm and I have no problems with its handing of film in the normal manner. It is quite different from the 9000, and light years faster, and cheaper.

 

Erl - I made faulty assumptions about the 5000, thanks for correcting - I was a roll-film user.

 

.... I have modified my 8000 in a way that I can 'borrow' the film holder from one of my enlarger neg carriers and insert the two metal plates to sandwich the film, thus holding it as flat as the enlarger.......

 

This sounds interesting, care to divulge more information about this set-up? Any pictures? I think I could easily be persuaded to re-modify my own film holder arrangement.

 

.............. Chris

Link to post
Share on other sites

Chris, to elaborate on my method, I should say it is the way I use the scanner neg carrier that I modify, not a modification of the holder itself.

 

I use the Nokon FH869M (mounted holder) which is great for mounted film in glass mounts etc. I use it to hold the Durst neg carrier plates (see pics) which in turn hold a film strip. I normally cut roll film into 3 strips of 4 for standard filing (see pics). For the frames at either end of the strip, no further cutting is necessary as the other frames will hang out the end freely. To access the 2 middle frames the strip must be cut in half to place the desired frame at an end for inserting in the Nikon carrier.

 

Foe low volume scanning this is exceptionally satisfactory. My workflow for scanning with rollfilm is not high these days so it no effort to handle each image on a one by one basis.

 

[ATTACH]163565[/ATTACH]

 

[ATTACH]163566[/ATTACH]

 

[ATTACH]163567[/ATTACH]

 

 

I hope you can find this technique of some benefit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

....I use the Nokon FH869M (mounted holder) .....I hope you can find this technique of some benefit.

 

Erl - I'm indebted to you, many thanks for the illustrations and explanation. This is a better variation on some of the 'work-arounds' for the 8000/9000; providing one's chosen film holder doesn't take the film beyond the focusing range of the scanner. Your thin-ish film holders clearly work, I'll mark this thread and give it some further thoughts. Thank you.

 

................ Chris

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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