[Jamey777]

This thread could theoretically go in the scanning forum but it's a rabbit trail off of another thread here.

I wanted to vouch for the Kodak Pakon 135 machines. The quality is phenomenal, and I probably won't even bother doing any post work unless it is a really special shot now.

I did 28 rolls casually feeding film as I did other things in the span of a work day. It's maybe 5-8 mins per roll, allowing for rotating and culling out bad shots using the software that comes with it.

I have been doing flatbed with the better scanning inserts previously, and there is no comparison as long as you can live with 135 only (no 120) and 6 megapixels.

I admit I was caught up in the megapixel race and was thinking that 6mp wasn't enough until I realized that I won't ever print larger than 8x10 (and could drum scan if I had to) or display on a TV better than 1080.... heck even the apple 27 inch display isn't 3000 pixels wide :-).

Anyway, great product, I highly recommend it. There is a facebook group for it where we are all contributing tips and tricks if you want more information.

Jamey

[stevebrot]

A few questions:

• Digital ICE?
• Can it handle short strips or individual frames?
• 6 megapixels is the pixel count. Do you have information regarding the actual optical resolution (dpi)?
• Is it a CCD device that essentially takes a photo of the negative (very fast) or a scanner?
• Bit depth (4, 8, 16)?

Steve

[Jamey777]

A few questions:

• Digital ICE?
• Can it handle short strips or individual frames?
• 6 megapixels is the pixel count. Do you have information regarding the actual optical resolution (dpi)?
• Is it a CCD device that essentially takes a photo of the negative (very fast) or a scanner?
• Bit depth (4, 8, 16)?

Steve

Digital ice , yes.... I posted a color shot in th pics thread just now... Works great.

It can do from 3 shots to 40... Most folks are calling it 'the pacman' because it just eats up the film

No clue on how it works.... I do know that I am super happy with the results and on the Facebook group there are folks putting up frontier scans and pakon and to be honest there isn't much difference.

It takes me longer to rotate and decide which photos to keep than it does to actually scan it with ice turned on.

[Jamey777]

Color straight from scanner (digital ice):
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/8-pentax-film-slr-discussion/53503-cool-l...ml#post2608442

B&W straight from scanner (no ice)
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/8-pentax-film-slr-discussion/159796-post-...ml#post2608436

[stevebrot]

folks putting up frontier scans and pakon and to be honest there isn't much difference.

That would be my concern. It was Frontier (and Fujitsu and Noritsu) scans that drove me to buy my first scanner. Despite high pixel counts, the resolution was generally poor and the amount of artifact was generally high. That being said, the guy at Costco was able to generate acceptable 8x10" prints from what I considered to be unacceptable scans.

It sounds like the Pakon is a good solution for high volume proofing. I would be interested in seeing examples (including full resolution crops) where care was taken to optimized the results.


Steve


Note: The Pakon's maximum pixel resolution of 3000 x 2000 is equivalent to a best case resolution of about 2000 dpi. This is a somewhat worse than an Epson V700 and a somewhat better than a V500/V600. If it is able to actually attain 2000 dpi, this scanner would be a boon for some users.

[Jamey777]

It's the difference for me feeling burdened by shooting film and feeling free

98% of my use case is screen... The other 2% prints so what you describe is exactly my situation....

[stevebrot]

I found Dante Stella's article on the similar (up-model) Pakon F235.

Dante Stella: Kodak / Pakon F235 Plus high-speed film scanner


Steve

[stevebrot]

I also found some example full-resolution TIFFs:

Buyers Guide: Pakon Kodak F-135 Plus 35mm Scanner : lamluce.net

See links towards the bottom of the review.


Steve