Scanner primarily for black & white negative film?

**ChrisPlatt** · 04-27-2013, 04:03 PM

To clarify "straight print" was my analogy (poor?) to wet printing; I should have said "straight scan".
I doubt I would print any scanned images at home. I'm more interested in sharing images on the Web.
I'm sure the same editing advice applies either way.

Originally posted by stevebrot

The results will be generally be acceptable and close to what you would get from Costco or Walgreens.

Originally posted by tuco

If you think you are somehow perserving the essence of film when you convert it to a digital image by not doing any adjustments,
you can expect flat, and dull images, I feel. And, yes, scanning is a lot of work. More so with BW film.

Definitely not encouraging...

FWIW I don't mind spending an hour in the darkroom to make one nice wet print,
but spending that much time editing an image on my PC just doesn't appeal to me.

Chris

Last edited by ChrisPlatt; 04-27-2013 at 04:21 PM.

tuco · 04-27-2013, 04:47 PM

Originally posted by ChrisPlatt

...
FWIW I don't mind spending an hour in the darkroom to make one nice wet print,
but spending that much time editing an image on my PC just doesn't appeal to me.

Chris

Well, you won't know until you try. Speaking for myself it doesn't matter to me. It's my image I like and if the medium is the computer monitor, I enjoy tuning the picture up in the editor just as much as I would in the darkroom. The reward is the same for me.

stevebrot · 04-27-2013, 05:13 PM

Originally posted by ChrisPlatt

FWIW I don't mind spending an hour in the darkroom to make one nice wet print,
but spending that much time editing an image on my PC just doesn't appeal to me.

Not to worry. I usually scan with minimal modification of the scanner settings and spend less than 2 minutes per image for PP (using Lightroom) for most of the images that I post on the Web. PP usually involves:

Adjusting crop and angle
Adding highlight recovery/and fill light if needed
Tweaks to overall contrast and to the curve as needed

For b&w I finish with a little faux selenium toning from a preset kit that I use. I would estimate total time per image at less than 7 minutes once you are comfortable with the tools.

Steve

brofkand · 04-28-2013, 09:21 AM

Originally posted by artobest

The Plustek Opticfilm 8100 is a dedicated 35mm film scanner with no ICE, so cheaper, while providing the same decent results for b&w.

I own this scanner's predecessor, the Opticfilm 7400. I get very detailed and sharp scans with the scanner with my B&W film. It does a great job on color too. I get scans up to roughly 3500 DPI. Considering the scanner was barely over $200, this is a high-value option. The Epson V500, which I owned previously, did not come close to that resolution. For the resolution demanded by 35mm and smaller formats, you really need a dedicated film scanner, and Plustek is currently one of the only companies out there making them.

I highly recommend the 7400 if you can find it, or the new 8100. There's no difference other than case color and the version of Silverfast bundled.

barbosas · 04-28-2013, 01:35 PM

For a beginner just looking to share some photos on the web and some small home prints the Epson V500 is enough, I can vouch for it.

I simple scan them with the Epson program (i tried a few others but the Epson program works for me) and after that i give them a bit of pp in Photoshop and they're good to go.

The scanning process can be a bit tedious, I usually scan in batches of 10 which takes between 10 and 20 minutes, depending on the resolution you select.

You can some example i recently took here:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/post-your-photos/223153-people-little-bit-film.html

samtr87 · 04-30-2013, 01:13 AM

@Barbosas: Do the images come out that sharp straight from the scanner or do you attain it with pp?

**ChrisPlatt** · 05-01-2013, 04:50 AM

Those scans look great barbosas. What Photoshop PP steps were required?

Did I hear a new APX100 clone will soon be available? That would be great.
If so I hope it's made on a thicker non-curling base than the last batch.

Some say tabular grain black and white films are easier to scan. Is this true?

Chris

stevebrot · 05-01-2013, 04:00 PM

Originally posted by ChrisPlatt

Did I hear a new APX100 clone will soon be available?

You mean something like Adox Silvermax?

Steve

RobG · 05-02-2013, 05:25 AM

Originally posted by jeztastic

I have been pleased with it, although I have discovered that the digital ICE and dust removal are useless or worse. Perhaps it's user error, I don't know.

FWIW - ICE relies on an infra-red scan pass to detect dust and damage. Silver halide films (and Kodachrome) are virtually opaque to IR in the dense areas of the image. ICE will work well with C41 process films and Ektachrome films (although Fujichrome 100F may be a challenge).

ambrosius · 06-12-2013, 04:15 PM

I have a Plustek 8200i and I´m really happy. In conjuction with vuescan and multiple scans and using a correct workflow, it´s great. For BW you can get the 8100, I chose the 8200i and paid the extra money because I shoot a lot of color too and need the infrared scan

**ChrisPlatt** · 10-11-2013, 06:34 PM

Update: I picked up a $99 refurbished V500 photo flatbed scanner from Epson
as well as a working Minolta Dimage Scan Dual IV film scanner ($115 on eBay).

Chris

stevebrot · 10-11-2013, 09:56 PM

Sounds like a ready to go! I am looking forward to your scans.

Steve

artobest · 10-14-2013, 05:00 AM

Hi Chris

That KM Dual IV can make pretty good scans, but you need to nurse it. As a dedicated film scanner, it has manually adjustable exposure for each channel - I strongly recommend you set that for each scan, particularly when scanning colour negatives. I usually tweak the channels until the histogram hump is more or less the same for each (may need some overall exposure adjustment to compensate), then set manual white and black points per channel (leaving plenty of headroom for inaccurate histograms). You will get quite noisy scans, but the noise is mainly chroma and is easily fixed with NR software with little or no image degradation.

Of course, for black and white you need only use one channel in the resultant image - play with the channel mixer in PS to find which gives the cleanest and/or sharpest output. By the way, if using Windows Vista/7/8 you will need the tweaked drivers, available here: Blog Frisno: Konica Minolta DiMAGE Scan Dual IV Works In Vista and 7

**ChrisPlatt** · 10-15-2013, 04:42 PM

Sounds complicated - exactly what has been keeping me from scanning in the first place. I hope it's simpler than it sounds.

Thanks for the link. I was under the impression that Vuescan was the only way to get this thing running under Windows 7.

Chris

lotsastuf · 10-28-2013, 09:02 PM

Originally posted by ChrisPlatt

Sounds complicated - exactly what has been keeping me from scanning in the first place. I hope it's simpler than it sounds.

Thanks for the link. I was under the impression that Vuescan was the only way to get this thing running under Windows 7.

Chris

I've got the V500 and a Canoscan FS4000 US which I found at thrift store in the original packing (no one knew what it was for - $10). The flatbed needs careful cleaning for dust before you scan or lots of work in PS. The Canoscan needs Vuescan to use with a MAC, but seems to be about as good as the Plusteks and Nikons I've used, plus I can run overnight if I want. I've mostly scanned B&W and run through PS for piezography prints on an Epson 220.

04-27-2013, 05:13 PM	#18
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by ChrisPlatt FWIW I don't mind spending an hour in the darkroom to make one nice wet print, but spending that much time editing an image on my PC just doesn't appeal to me. Not to worry. I usually scan with minimal modification of the scanner settings and spend less than 2 minutes per image for PP (using Lightroom) for most of the images that I post on the Web. PP usually involves: Adjusting crop and angle Adding highlight recovery/and fill light if needed Tweaks to overall contrast and to the curve as needed For b&w I finish with a little faux selenium toning from a preset kit that I use. I would estimate total time per image at less than 7 minutes once you are comfortable with the tools. Steve

04-28-2013, 01:35 PM	#20
barbosas Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Lisbon Photos: Gallery Posts: 683	For a beginner just looking to share some photos on the web and some small home prints the Epson V500 is enough, I can vouch for it. I simple scan them with the Epson program (i tried a few others but the Epson program works for me) and after that i give them a bit of pp in Photoshop and they're good to go. The scanning process can be a bit tedious, I usually scan in batches of 10 which takes between 10 and 20 minutes, depending on the resolution you select. You can some example i recently took here: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/post-your-photos/223153-people-little-bit-film.html Last edited by barbosas; 04-28-2013 at 01:41 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
negative scanner shows images as black	rcbs	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	11	09-02-2012 05:41 AM
Ilford Black & White Film Newbee...	DaveHolmes	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	13	01-27-2011 07:09 PM
Yet another Negative film scanner advice needed thread	ismaelg	Film Processing, Scanning, and Darkroom	27	06-23-2010 08:54 PM
Film/negative scanner	leadbelly	Film Processing, Scanning, and Darkroom	8	09-15-2008 08:55 PM
Black & White film, part 2	Morbo	Post Your Photos!	5	09-09-2008 09:25 PM

04-27-2013, 04:03 PM	#16
ChrisPlatt Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Rockaway Beach NYC Posts: 7,696 Original Poster	To clarify "straight print" was my analogy (poor?) to wet printing; I should have said "straight scan". I doubt I would print any scanned images at home. I'm more interested in sharing images on the Web. I'm sure the same editing advice applies either way. Originally posted by stevebrot The results will be generally be acceptable and close to what you would get from Costco or Walgreens. Originally posted by tuco If you think you are somehow perserving the essence of film when you convert it to a digital image by not doing any adjustments, you can expect flat, and dull images, I feel. And, yes, scanning is a lot of work. More so with BW film. Definitely not encouraging... FWIW I don't mind spending an hour in the darkroom to make one nice wet print, but spending that much time editing an image on my PC just doesn't appeal to me. Chris Last edited by ChrisPlatt; 04-27-2013 at 04:21 PM.

04-27-2013, 04:47 PM	#17
tuco Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Pugetopolis Posts: 11,029	Originally posted by ChrisPlatt ... FWIW I don't mind spending an hour in the darkroom to make one nice wet print, but spending that much time editing an image on my PC just doesn't appeal to me. Chris Well, you won't know until you try. Speaking for myself it doesn't matter to me. It's my image I like and if the medium is the computer monitor, I enjoy tuning the picture up in the editor just as much as I would in the darkroom. The reward is the same for me.

04-28-2013, 09:21 AM	#19
brofkand Pentaxian Join Date: May 2009 Location: North Carolina Posts: 836	Originally posted by artobest The Plustek Opticfilm 8100 is a dedicated 35mm film scanner with no ICE, so cheaper, while providing the same decent results for b&w. I own this scanner's predecessor, the Opticfilm 7400. I get very detailed and sharp scans with the scanner with my B&W film. It does a great job on color too. I get scans up to roughly 3500 DPI. Considering the scanner was barely over $200, this is a high-value option. The Epson V500, which I owned previously, did not come close to that resolution. For the resolution demanded by 35mm and smaller formats, you really need a dedicated film scanner, and Plustek is currently one of the only companies out there making them. I highly recommend the 7400 if you can find it, or the new 8100. There's no difference other than case color and the version of Silverfast bundled.

04-30-2013, 01:13 AM	#21
samtr87 Inactive Account Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: FL Posts: 246	@Barbosas: Do the images come out that sharp straight from the scanner or do you attain it with pp?

05-01-2013, 04:50 AM	#22
ChrisPlatt Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Rockaway Beach NYC Posts: 7,696 Original Poster	Those scans look great barbosas. What Photoshop PP steps were required? Did I hear a new APX100 clone will soon be available? That would be great. If so I hope it's made on a thicker non-curling base than the last batch. Some say tabular grain black and white films are easier to scan. Is this true? Chris

05-01-2013, 04:00 PM	#23
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by ChrisPlatt Did I hear a new APX100 clone will soon be available? You mean something like Adox Silvermax? Steve

05-02-2013, 05:25 AM	#24
RobG Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Canberra Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,902	Originally posted by jeztastic I have been pleased with it, although I have discovered that the digital ICE and dust removal are useless or worse. Perhaps it's user error, I don't know. FWIW - ICE relies on an infra-red scan pass to detect dust and damage. Silver halide films (and Kodachrome) are virtually opaque to IR in the dense areas of the image. ICE will work well with C41 process films and Ektachrome films (although Fujichrome 100F may be a challenge).

06-12-2013, 04:15 PM	#25
ambrosius New Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Posts: 18	I have a Plustek 8200i and I´m really happy. In conjuction with vuescan and multiple scans and using a correct workflow, it´s great. For BW you can get the 8100, I chose the 8200i and paid the extra money because I shoot a lot of color too and need the infrared scan

10-11-2013, 06:34 PM	#26
ChrisPlatt Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Rockaway Beach NYC Posts: 7,696 Original Poster	Update: I picked up a $99 refurbished V500 photo flatbed scanner from Epson as well as a working Minolta Dimage Scan Dual IV film scanner ($115 on eBay). Chris

10-11-2013, 09:56 PM	#27
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Sounds like a ready to go! I am looking forward to your scans. Steve

10-14-2013, 05:00 AM	#28
artobest Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Swansea, Wales Posts: 455	Hi Chris That KM Dual IV can make pretty good scans, but you need to nurse it. As a dedicated film scanner, it has manually adjustable exposure for each channel - I strongly recommend you set that for each scan, particularly when scanning colour negatives. I usually tweak the channels until the histogram hump is more or less the same for each (may need some overall exposure adjustment to compensate), then set manual white and black points per channel (leaving plenty of headroom for inaccurate histograms). You will get quite noisy scans, but the noise is mainly chroma and is easily fixed with NR software with little or no image degradation. Of course, for black and white you need only use one channel in the resultant image - play with the channel mixer in PS to find which gives the cleanest and/or sharpest output. By the way, if using Windows Vista/7/8 you will need the tweaked drivers, available here: Blog Frisno: Konica Minolta DiMAGE Scan Dual IV Works In Vista and 7

10-15-2013, 04:42 PM	#29
ChrisPlatt Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Rockaway Beach NYC Posts: 7,696 Original Poster	Sounds complicated - exactly what has been keeping me from scanning in the first place. I hope it's simpler than it sounds. Thanks for the link. I was under the impression that Vuescan was the only way to get this thing running under Windows 7. Chris

10-28-2013, 09:02 PM	#30
lotsastuf New Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Wisconsin Posts: 7	Originally posted by ChrisPlatt Sounds complicated - exactly what has been keeping me from scanning in the first place. I hope it's simpler than it sounds. Thanks for the link. I was under the impression that Vuescan was the only way to get this thing running under Windows 7. Chris I've got the V500 and a Canoscan FS4000 US which I found at thrift store in the original packing (no one knew what it was for - $10). The flatbed needs careful cleaning for dust before you scan or lots of work in PS. The Canoscan needs Vuescan to use with a MAC, but seems to be about as good as the Plusteks and Nikons I've used, plus I can run overnight if I want. I've mostly scanned B&W and run through PS for piezography prints on an Epson 220.