[Wombat]

One of the camera shops in town which I trust recommends the PlusTek Optic Film 7200. It's a dedicated film scanner, currently selling for about $300AUD. It would surely be cheaper in the USA than here. Might be worth a Google. Scanning your own is slow and the results vary greatly depending not only on the quality of the machine but also the software. A graphic designer friend reckons SilverFast is way better than Vuescan. It's the old story, you gets what you pays for.

[vinzer]

Just keep in mind that neither ICE nor FARE work with traditional silver halide b/w films. That is because color films use translucent dyes and the infrared light used by ICE/FARE can pass through. It can't pass through dust, though, so that is how the scanner knows where dust is. It then uses software to cover the dust spot using data from the surrounding area.

With b/w films you have to be reeeeeaaaaal careful to clean your negatives (and the inside of the scanner, if a flatbed) before you start the scan process. With color and ICE/FARE it isn't such a big deal. Basically just keep the scanner glass clean and blow on your negatives before you put them in.

I learn something new from you everyday. Thank you.

All along I thought ICE and FARE cleans up B&W scans the same as colored films. Obviously, I have ways to go before I can be confident working with film.

[vinzer]

Noodling around all day on a computer is dead boring!

Chris
.

True, that. I can't complain, though. Fudging around with computers is what puts food on my table.

One of the camera shops in town which I trust recommends the PlusTek Optic Film 7200. It's a dedicated film scanner, currently selling for about $300AUD. It would surely be cheaper in the USA than here. Might be worth a Google. Scanning your own is slow and the results vary greatly depending not only on the quality of the machine but also the software. A graphic designer friend reckons SilverFast is way better than Vuescan. It's the old story, you gets what you pays for.

I wish we had the same wide range of film scanners to choose from. The lone dedicated film scanners we have here are Nikons, and those cost quite a lot for me. I'm pretty okay with my 4400F, but it's slow as molasses.

[Mike Cash]

I'm pretty okay with my 4400F, but it's slow as molasses.

Are you using the bundled software? If you are, you'll be amazed how much faster third-party software works.

[Blue]

I'm currently using an Epson V500 to scan 35mm and medium format film. It goes all the way up to 12,800 dpi. I usually use 2400 or 3200 for 35mm negatives and it takes 1.5 -3 minutes depending on if I use dust removal, ICE, etc.

[vinzer]

I'm currently using an Epson V500 to scan 35mm and medium format film. It goes all the way up to 12,800 dpi. I usually use 2400 or 3200 for 35mm negatives and it takes 1.5 -3 minutes depending on if I use dust removal, ICE, etc.

3 minutes ain't bad. My scans take longer, and I don't even have ICE/FARE on my scanner!

Are you using the bundled software? If you are, you'll be amazed how much faster third-party software works.

Yup, I'm still running Canon's bundled software. I took a look at VueScan you guys have mentioned, and see how that checks out later. Looks like a nice program.

[Ben_Edict]

The one that caught my eye of the bunch was the Epson V700. $549 is still a fair chunk of cash, and I don't necessarily need 6400dpi, but I am very interested in Digital ICE and the dual-lens pickup these are equipped with. Dust and defect correction is a major plus if I want to be able to make prints from the digital backups.

... I don't have any issue with the digital workflow, what I don't like is the output that digital provides. Film is a wonderful medium to create with, but the workflow is tedious. I'm trying to marry the two.

I use currently the V700 with Silverfast AI, which makes a nice combo. If set-up correctly (i.e. adjusted spacers for the film holders etc.) the scans are simply much better (!), than those my old Nikon Coolscan III (30) film scanner produces. The resolution might be a tad lower (like 2300 dpi for the Coolscan versus 2200 dpi for the V700), but colours and contrast are so much more natural, that the time for post-editing is dramaticlally reduced.

The drawback of the V700 is file size: to achieve maximum resolution I have to scan at 6400 dpi setting, which equals 2200 dpi (give or take a few lines) real resolution. So a single 35mm neg/slide consumes something like 300 MB (a question of colour depth, too). A current good film scanner will have somewhat higher real resolution, but still producing smaller files.

But I bought the V700 not for 35mm (though I use it for that from time to time) but for medium and large format. For that application the V700 and its more expensive brother the V750 are simply the best value on the market – especially if you have seen the prices for dedicated medium format film scanners...

Ben