Scanning film....or not?

k100d · 05-27-2009, 05:11 AM

dedicated, nikon coolscan

**Lowell Goudge** · 05-27-2009, 05:23 AM

sounds a little like shakespear doesn't it?

Actually, I sold my darkroom when I went digital, so that somewhat forced me as to what I do, I scan negs.

The real issue is whether you do straight prints or do a lot of work with dodging and burning, or masks, or with variable contrast paper, or double exposures.

Any of those things can make you want to scan the finished product as opposed to the negative only because you may have worked rather hard on getting the print to look like what you wanted.

Having said that however, many of the same functions are possible , and easier to control in a digital photo editor.

I used a minolta dimage II scanner which was a little slow, but did not fail even with 20,000 scans. The reliability was impressive

stevebrot · 05-27-2009, 05:50 AM

Originally posted by k100d

dedicated, nikon coolscan

Yep...that is the conventional wisdom. Unfortunately, the rumor is that Nikon is nixing their scanner line-up. Plustek might be a good, less expensive option. They have a new model due out later this summer that is supposed to be faster, better, etc..

Steve

Cideway · 05-27-2009, 05:23 PM

Having used the Imacon at work, the Nikon's just seem so... rubbish. That said not every one has a spare $20k for the Imacon.

I have used the Epson flat beds (4880, 4900, v700) to scan negs, they are alot better on B&W and slide then they are on colour neg (that said these days no real point in shooting colour neg anyway) and so long as you hold the film flat i find a 20c piece (AUD) in each corner is enough to hold the neg flat so the only film flatness issues are from camera.

stevebrot · 05-28-2009, 09:34 AM

Originally posted by Cideway

Having used the Imacon at work, the Nikon's just seem so... rubbish. That said not every one has a spare $20k for the Imacon.

I should have put a disclaimer on my earlier comment to note that the Coolscans are considered to be the best non-commercial option. I had a chance to get an Imacon for only $4k, but figured that the Nikon would probably be adequate.

Steve

stevebrot · 05-28-2009, 09:45 AM

Real nice unit...much more compact than I expected. I have not had much time to play with it, but here are my initial newbie impressions:

Very compact
Nice build quality
Confusing software (separate docs on second disk are essential)
Very fast scans at all resolutions
Very big files at maximum resolution
ICE is real cool
ICE does not work with B&W negs (not cool)
16 bit B&W results are simply incredible
Every little defect on the neg is incredibly visible, even minor scratches on the non-emulsion side. Not a problem with ICE. Without ICE...not so good

Coming from using a diffusion enlarger head, that last point was a bit disappointing. Oh, well...I guess I will be spending hours with the cloning tool...

Steve

(Will post a full review sometime in the future...)

photolady95 · 05-28-2009, 11:32 AM

My flatbed Epson Perfection photo 4490 comes with Digital Ice but I'm not familar with this software or what it actually does. Can someone elaborate?

Cosmo · 05-28-2009, 11:39 AM

I do both. It's convenient to scan the whole roll, then I print some of them later.

stevebrot · 05-28-2009, 11:46 AM

Originally posted by photolady

My flatbed Epson Perfection photo 4490 comes with Digital Ice but I'm not familar with this software or what it actually does. Can someone elaborate?

It detects dust and scratches and via a process using black magic, makes them disappear.

Steve

Cosmo · 05-28-2009, 02:38 PM

The only problem with ICE is that it takes so much longer to scan, like triples the time. Some bigger scans can take up to 25mins.

stevebrot · 05-28-2009, 02:54 PM

Originally posted by Cosmo

The only problem with ICE is that it takes so much longer to scan, like triples the time. Some bigger scans can take up to 25mins.

I have heard that as well, though things seemed snappy enough last night scanning 35mm color negs at 4000 DPI, single-pass.

Steve

Cosmo · 05-28-2009, 02:57 PM

It may have something to do with my computer, it's very old and slow.

stevebrot · 05-28-2009, 03:30 PM

Originally posted by Cosmo

It may have something to do with my computer, it's very old and slow.

That might be a factor. Mine is a quad core beast (vroom...vroom).

Steve

photolady95 · 05-28-2009, 06:29 PM

Thanks for the info. My computer isn't old and slow either, but it is not a quad yet, it is only dual core. But I have Windows 7 on 64bit with 4gbs of ram....self built.

I haven't actually used Digital Ice, so maybe I'll give it a try on those dusty negs I have.

Venturi · 05-28-2009, 07:57 PM

Glad to hear you're liking the scanner, Steve. Did you buy the roll adapter and/or are you scanning full strips? Or are you pre-cutting your negs?

I'm still weighing the cost-vs-pain of going with the Nikon vs the Pacific Imaging.

05-27-2009, 05:23 AM	#17
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,888	to scan or not to scan sounds a little like shakespear doesn't it? Actually, I sold my darkroom when I went digital, so that somewhat forced me as to what I do, I scan negs. The real issue is whether you do straight prints or do a lot of work with dodging and burning, or masks, or with variable contrast paper, or double exposures. Any of those things can make you want to scan the finished product as opposed to the negative only because you may have worked rather hard on getting the print to look like what you wanted. Having said that however, many of the same functions are possible , and easier to control in a digital photo editor. I used a minolta dimage II scanner which was a little slow, but did not fail even with 20,000 scans. The reliability was impressive

05-28-2009, 09:45 AM	#21
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Got the Nikon Coolcan 5000 ED Yesterday Real nice unit...much more compact than I expected. I have not had much time to play with it, but here are my initial newbie impressions: Very compact Nice build quality Confusing software (separate docs on second disk are essential) Very fast scans at all resolutions Very big files at maximum resolution ICE is real cool ICE does not work with B&W negs (not cool) 16 bit B&W results are simply incredible Every little defect on the neg is incredibly visible, even minor scratches on the non-emulsion side. Not a problem with ICE. Without ICE...not so good Coming from using a diffusion enlarger head, that last point was a bit disappointing. Oh, well...I guess I will be spending hours with the cloning tool... Steve (Will post a full review sometime in the future...)

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Outsourcing Film Scanning ...	Dubesor	Pentax Medium Format	20	07-16-2010 10:38 PM
Scanning MF film	Macroguy	Pentax Medium Format	32	05-20-2010 07:13 AM
Scanning the film	pentagor	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	24	12-18-2008 04:58 AM
Film scanning	straightshooter	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	7	09-09-2008 08:01 PM
Film scanning gear	spe	Photographic Technique	3	03-26-2008 02:58 AM

05-27-2009, 05:11 AM	#16
k100d Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Toronto Posts: 3,911	dedicated, nikon coolscan

05-27-2009, 05:50 AM	#18
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by k100d dedicated, nikon coolscan Yep...that is the conventional wisdom. Unfortunately, the rumor is that Nikon is nixing their scanner line-up. Plustek might be a good, less expensive option. They have a new model due out later this summer that is supposed to be faster, better, etc.. Steve

05-27-2009, 05:23 PM	#19
Cideway Inactive Account Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Adelaide, South Australia, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 364	Having used the Imacon at work, the Nikon's just seem so... rubbish. That said not every one has a spare $20k for the Imacon. I have used the Epson flat beds (4880, 4900, v700) to scan negs, they are alot better on B&W and slide then they are on colour neg (that said these days no real point in shooting colour neg anyway) and so long as you hold the film flat i find a 20c piece (AUD) in each corner is enough to hold the neg flat so the only film flatness issues are from camera.

05-28-2009, 09:34 AM	#20
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by Cideway Having used the Imacon at work, the Nikon's just seem so... rubbish. That said not every one has a spare $20k for the Imacon. I should have put a disclaimer on my earlier comment to note that the Coolscans are considered to be the best non-commercial option. I had a chance to get an Imacon for only $4k, but figured that the Nikon would probably be adequate. Steve

05-28-2009, 11:32 AM	#22
photolady95 Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: May 2009 Location: Cruising the forum watching his back Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,712	My flatbed Epson Perfection photo 4490 comes with Digital Ice but I'm not familar with this software or what it actually does. Can someone elaborate?

05-28-2009, 11:39 AM	#23
Cosmo Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 488	I do both. It's convenient to scan the whole roll, then I print some of them later.

05-28-2009, 11:46 AM	#24
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by photolady My flatbed Epson Perfection photo 4490 comes with Digital Ice but I'm not familar with this software or what it actually does. Can someone elaborate? It detects dust and scratches and via a process using black magic, makes them disappear. Steve

05-28-2009, 02:38 PM	#25
Cosmo Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 488	The only problem with ICE is that it takes so much longer to scan, like triples the time. Some bigger scans can take up to 25mins.

05-28-2009, 02:54 PM	#26
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by Cosmo The only problem with ICE is that it takes so much longer to scan, like triples the time. Some bigger scans can take up to 25mins. I have heard that as well, though things seemed snappy enough last night scanning 35mm color negs at 4000 DPI, single-pass. Steve

05-28-2009, 02:57 PM	#27
Cosmo Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 488	It may have something to do with my computer, it's very old and slow.

05-28-2009, 03:30 PM	#28
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by Cosmo It may have something to do with my computer, it's very old and slow. That might be a factor. Mine is a quad core beast (vroom...vroom). Steve

05-28-2009, 06:29 PM	#29
photolady95 Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: May 2009 Location: Cruising the forum watching his back Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,712	Thanks for the info. My computer isn't old and slow either, but it is not a quad yet, it is only dual core. But I have Windows 7 on 64bit with 4gbs of ram....self built. I haven't actually used Digital Ice, so maybe I'll give it a try on those dusty negs I have.

05-28-2009, 07:57 PM	#30
Venturi Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Tulsa, OK Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,636	Glad to hear you're liking the scanner, Steve. Did you buy the roll adapter and/or are you scanning full strips? Or are you pre-cutting your negs? I'm still weighing the cost-vs-pain of going with the Nikon vs the Pacific Imaging.