Scanners

M

Matt B

New Member
Registered
Hi all,

I'm new here, please forgive the newbie question. I'm a long time digital shooter and have recently been shooting 35mm and medium format film. I'd like to be able to scan the negatives for editing and printing (mostly B&W but likely some color as well). Being that I have fairly low scanning volume (maybe 2-3 rolls a month), I'm thinking that the V600 might be a good starting place and then maybe get something larger/faster/more advanced one down the road if I need it.

What are your thoughts on this? The V850 is a lot more expensive, I'm not sure it's worth it in terms of the improved scan quality (there are "refurbished" options on the Epson website and also used models on ebay, though, not sure if these are worth considering).

Thank you in advance for any thoughts & suggestions you may have.

Best,
Matt
 
After having seen the results from 35mm scans on flatbeds, my personal opinion is, don't bother. Think about rigging up a way of photographing them on your digital camera. A whole lot cheaper.

I can understand wanting to scan MF film but I must ask why on earth you would bother with 35mm film since there is way more resolution and quality in a digital shot. As for the "feel" of film, there are several film emulations out there - I use DxO's FilmPack. and, unless you are a true masochist, steer well clear of colour neg. Of course, as usual, YMMV.
 
Try to think ahead, the v600 does not scan 4x5 negs, the v850 does, as said above the flat beds are a bit naff at scanning 35mm, however with some carful editing you might be happy. If you want the film look shoot film, or faux it with software
 
Thanks, Joanna! Yes, I have seen YouTube videos about doing this (like this one: ). I think I will give it a try first.
 
Thanks, Martin! I totally agree: I might use scanning for medium format (and possibly large format) only and use Joanna's suggestion for 35mm. By the way, your videos on pinhole photography and contrast grading are simply wonderful and were key in inspiring me to get into film. Thank you so much!
 
One of the best ways to scan is to scan and produce a linear raw file, open that up in Photoshop, then use a plugin called colorperfect to convert the negative to a positive, that way you have complete control of how you want the picture to look and not rely on any behind the scene software adjustments, this is one good reason to use a film scanner as against a DSLR scan. I will be doing an in depth video soon about how to do this in the near future
 
I am now considering a scanner or the digital camera approach to digitizing slides. A reasonable scanner (if I get a new one - Plustek 135i has a motorised feed) is £400 then it seems I need a couple of bits of s/w VueScan for scanning and Colorperfect for negative to positive conversion, both about £100 each.

The alternative is a macro lens for my GFX50R which if I dont go down the Fuji route I might get for a similar price, but assume I will still need the Colorperfect s/w and the negative holder / lightbox attachment 'thing'.

The advantage of the GFX route seems to be I get a ready baked raw file and if I can completing nuts I could move up to medium format film. The disadvantage is the manual focusing needed for every negative and feeding the film strip through in not very well controlled way.

The dedicated scanner feels the best approach, I have looked around on eBay for Minolta and Nikon scanners but they are many years old and still selling for many £100's.

Does anybody here successfully use SIlverfast s/w that comes included with some of the Plustek scanners? There seems a lot of aversion to it but I assume it does combine both Vuescan and Colourperfect, is the finished quality any worse ?

Thanks for any views or suggestions
 
I would not go down the plustek scanner route, you get what you pay for. I have scanned with Nikon scanners 9000ed, 5000ed and epson v800 all using vuescan software and colorPerfect for conversion , great results as you would expect from the Nikons, the epson v800 is ok for m/f and 4x5 scans , totally useless for 35 mm,
Over the last few months, and because my aging 9000scanner died I have been scanning the negs using a mirroless camera, the results match the Nikon scan quality perhaps surpass it, much better than the Epson 800 flatbed , after using this method I have had a change of mind, it’s a route I would recommend taking especially if you own an digital mirror less or DSLR camera , buy the macro, lens, you will need some sort of neg holder and LED light source, plus away of holding the camera to photograph the negatives
 
I am surprised that Joanna and Martin have such a poor opinion of 35m film scanned on a flatbed scanner. I don't have the latest scanner - I use an Epson V700 flatbed scanner, and don't use Viewscan or anything - just the professional mode scanning software that came with the scanner, and I get results that I'm very happy with. To put this into context, I still have a darkroom so I can make a darkroom print from a 35mm negative, then scan the same negative and make a digital print. I get virtually identical results. Similar tonality, similar sharpness.
Some films scan better than others. Delta 100 doesn't scan well for me. But this isn't a problem because I much prefer the tonality and general look of FP4 . And this scans very well. HP5 also scans very well. The professional mode software on the V700 allows you to scan with USM at a low, medium, or high level. Or scan with it off. The USM it applies is of a high quality. and if it is applied at a medium level to FP4 or HP5, and no further sharpening is applied at the printing stage, then the sharpness of the digital print is equal to the sharpness of a good darkroom print of the same size, from the same negative. But there is an advantage to be gained with the digital approach. If I want a big print, I can apply extra sharpening at the printing stage. HP5 and FP4 can take this without showing anything dodgy. Because I do a lot of photography on the North York Moors, I have something which I call the dead bracken test. If you have dead bracken in the picture, and you overdo things in Photoshop, the bracken prints out with an unnatural and unpleasant texture. So I avoid overdoing things, but can still apply enough usm to a 35mm FP4 negative to make a really nice sharp 18 by 12 inch digital print, on the odd occasion that I want a big print.
I used to scan 35mm negatives in a Nikon 35mm film scanner. I may have been doing something wrong but this scanner always emphasised the grain, and produced more grain than you would see in a comparative darkroom print. But my flatbed Epson V700 scanner reproduces the grain exactly like you see it in a darkroom print from the same negative.
 
Alan, if you're happy with your flatbed scans then that's fine, personally, I found the flatbed scanners almost unusable for 35mm scans, this is from the point of view of a person who sells their work as a print and demand as much detail, Dmax and optical resolution from Dedicated Autofocus scanners or Digital cameras scans, the flatbed doesn't come near when compared side by side.
 
Martin Henson said:
Alan, if you're happy with your flatbed scans then that's fine, personally, I found the flatbed scanners almost unusable for 35mm scans, this is from the point of view of a person who sells their work as a print and demand as much detail, Dmax and optical resolution from Dedicated Autofocus scanners or Digital cameras scans, the flatbed doesn't come near when compared side by side.
Click to expand...
Martin, I too demand high quality in my prints, and have sold lots of them over the years. You may even have seen some, if you went in the Gascoigne Gallery in Harrogate, before it closed. All I can say is that my digital prints, from 35mm negatives scanned on a flatbed scanner, are an excellent match to darkroom prints done with the same negative. I don't see how that can be improved on.
I will say that the 35mm negative holders that came with my flatbed scanner needed a bit of work on them to get them to work well. (The 120 and 5 x 4 holders were fine)
 
Ian, I use a Canon m50 mk2 24meg res, I use a Canon 28mm Macro Lens, the set up is below, I find the file size just enough for the sizes I print, max 16x12

setup.jpg
 
Alan Clark said:
Martin, I too demand high quality in my prints, and have sold lots of them over the years. You may even have seen some, if you went in the Gascoigne Gallery in Harrogate, before it closed. All I can say is that my digital prints, from 35mm negatives scanned on a flatbed scanner, are an excellent match to darkroom prints done with the same negative. I don't see how that can be improved on.
I will say that the 35mm negative holders that came with my flatbed scanner needed a bit of work on them to get them to work well. (The 120 and 5 x 4 holders were fine)
Click to expand...
Well each to there own, Alan, my tests, one of which is on a YouTube video, over the years which included the .v700 did not match your findings , but I digress as your post process skills must be to a high quality that I cannot seems to get from flatbeds
 
I have been using a krokus copy stand similar to the one shown here: Hyperlink to eBay

It is built like a brick out house. The Meopta versions are pretty sturdy too. Both are reasonably priced.
 
Last edited:
The V600 is a solid choice for starters, especially if you're not scanning loads of rolls every month. It's good for both B&W and color. The V850 offers better quality but is pricier. Refurbished options or used ones on eBay could save you some cash.
 
I use a V600 for scanning prints that appear from time to time on here the only flaw I have found is when scanning B&W they tend to result in images with a cyan cast to them but that can soon be dealt with. With 35mm it is at it's limit but for 120 film it is in it's element.
Images from negatives or old slides scanned to go through my digital projector which result in projection images of around 4" on the longest side are no problem either However I doubt of they would stand projection onto a larger screen than my 5x5 feet lenticular screen.
It's predecessor a V500 which I still have but will not work on a late version of Windows 10 or 11.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top