Revisiting The Epson V800 For 35mm

[ian barber]

My dedicated Minolta film scanner is failing more times than it's working now so I have decided to move it on as repairs/spares.
This has left me with only the Epson V800 for scanning all formats.

I am not too concerned about the quality the V800 produces for MF and LF but for 35mm it needs a little more attention.
I have started to look more closely at trying to refine my workflow when using the Epson V800 for 35mm.

Here are three test scans so far using the Epson-supplied 35mm holder and Silverfast 8 as the scanning software.

 

[Alan Clark]

I use an Epson V700 scanner, which I have had for a good few years. Like Ian, I have always been happy with it for 120 and large format scanning. But for 35mm I used a minolta film scanner, then when it packed in I switched to a Nikon film scanner. And when that packed in I took another look at how to get the best out of my V700 for 35mm. The first thing that I noticed was that the Epson 35mm film holder sagged in the middle. If a strip of 6 negatives was placed at the edge of the holder and one frame was scanned, then the strip moved to the centre and the same frame scanned again, I got a different level of sharpness. I managed to resolve this problem by gluing a short strip of wood at each end of the frame, in the central position. These act as packing, and keep the frame level. I experimented first with different thicknesses of wood, and found I needed a 3mm thick piece at one end, and - for some reason - a 4mm thick piece at the other end.
Then I experimented with raising and lowering the entire frame, using the+ and - feet supplied by Epson.
Even when I got the optimum amount of sharpening, it was obvious that I needed to apply extra sharpening to get a good result. As I still print in the darkroom I was able to compare prints done digitally and in the darkroom from the same negative. To match the sharpness of darkroom prints, I find USM applied when scanning works well. I use Epson's own software, and this allows you to apply USM at a low, medium, or high level. I select "medium".
This leaves me the option of applying a bit more sharpening immediately before printing. I take care not to overdo this, but I do find that I can produce a digital print that is slightly sharper than its darkroom equivalent, yet still not look overdone.

 

[ian barber]

I managed to resolve this problem by gluing a short strip of wood at each end of the frame, in the central position

Be interested to see what you did here. I don't think the V800 suffers from this as they use a different holder to the V700, makes me wonder if they strengthened them.

 

[Pete B]

I used to have a V700 but was never happy with the scans. I bought Better Scanning strip holders with antinewton ring glass, but was still unimpressed. I bought a new Plustek 8100i for £180 off amazon, and it has been great using Vuescan. I keep meaning to arrange to send a negative and one of my raw scans to Martin so he can do a video comparing the fixed focus 8100i and his new Nikon 5000. I know the Nikon will come top, but it will be interesting to see the difference.
Pete

 

[ian barber]

Yes, the Nikon 5000Ed is a nice scanner for 35mm, it's probably on the same level as my Minolta Multi Pro but I think they are both well overpriced now for a piece of kit which is over 15 years old.

All 3 tests you see above are native scans at 3200ppi and then sized for the web at 1080px.

This one was exposed at F/2 and I focused on the front of the first step. I tried the scan with both Vuescan and Silverfast and to be honest, Silverfast produced a much cleaner tonal-rich scan.

 

[John King]

I have found an engineer (independent) based in Lincoln who will service and clean Nikon film scanners from the LS 4 and later. I am waiting for him to reply although on his website he does say that due to pressure of work it may take a while to get back to me. Apparently most Nikon scanners can be serviced and he does have a number of spares for items that are known to fail or deteriorate but for most. usually a good clean and lubricate with the same grease as used by Nikon is all they need.
Apparently the main problem is the way they are stored when not in use. because the main internal mirror can be at a right angle (really the wrong angle?) which allows dust to land on the surface and remain there resulting in a degraded image lacking in contrast. They should always be covered over as well. This seems what has taken place with mine mine,it has never been covered, and just lived on a shelf when not in use.

I have always stored my 50ED in the vertical position which he mentions is wrong and they should be stored on the side to avoid dust settling when not in use. Apparently either side is better than upright. I have owned this scanner since around 2010 so it is well, but not heavily used and needs a bit of TLC.

This came to light when I realised the contrast from my Epson scanner was quite a bit visibly higher after a scan of the same negative. I did two identical scans of the same colour negative and the one from the Nikon is visibly softer and lacking contrast than the same negative than my Epson V600. The definition on the Nikon is still miles better with the usual high definition, just lacking in contrast.

He goes on to say most of the Nikon film scanners are so well built they soldier on for years and such is the high build quality, they can still be regarded as only now reaching middle age and will last for many years to come.

The website can be found on:-

https://lincolnscan.co.uk/Coolscan.html. It is worth a read.

 

[John King]

I have had a reply from him and for one of the 35mm scanners is £70 for a basic clean and check, inclusive of postage back. The full service that includes a full strip down, cleaning the mirrors and sensors and a full check is £95 again with the postage Included.
Unfortunately there is a considerable waiting list but I am going ahead and booked it in to be done, so it will be several more months before my name will be at the top of the list.