need help choosing a scanner for film negatives

[heshanj]

hey everyone. its been a while since i was last on here. ive recently gone into film photography, got myself an old nikon FM2n and a canon rangefinder (on the way) and ive been thinking of developing my own film. and since printing by myself sounds a bit hard (n expensive), i thought i'd scan the negatives i develop, and view on computer as i do with my digital photos

so to cut the long story short, this is wat i basically need: to view a good quality image on my computer, as i would view a photo from my dslr. but i wont be viewing 100% crops, or pixel peeping or anything of the sort. just a good quality image to view if the photo is good or not. i will also not be doing massive prints, but i'd like to do normal sized prints (11x14, i think) from the scanned images. i'll mainly be scanning 35mm negatives, not slides.. and mainly black n white, but probably some color too

so basically (after all the explaining), do i need a dedicated film scanner for this (which i doubt i can afford) or will a new good flatbed scanner do it? my budget is not much, around USD200 would be idea, willing to stretch to USD300

ive been looking at the Canon Canoscan 9000F. looks pretty good, i saw some samples which look fine for me, but im not sure about it
ive also been looking at the old Epson 4990 Pro, which i can find refurbished here, for around the same price as the new Canon. im thinking about this Epson coz kenrockwell.com has a glowing review on it, and its really tempting, since i cant afford the Epson V700/750. he even compares it to his minolta dedicated film scanner

the other option is a used film scanner, such as minolta dimage scan elite.. which might be a bit hard to find (im not in singapore at the moment, and might not be for a couple of months) so i cant really find it here.

so finally, would any of u recommend either the Canon 9000F or the Epson 4990 Pro? for the purposes that i mentioned. and if there are any other recommendations for the same price i.e. other flatbeds or other cheap film scanners, please let me know

thanks for ur time, i know this is a super long post! cheers

 

[foxtwo]

The 4990 flatbed can scan up to 4x5, if you're not going beyond 35mm it might be a waste? I'm using the 4990 myself, other than hardware, software plays a part as well. You can look under my clubsnap member gallery for examples -> medium format & large format album

Anyway, have you considered paying for scanning? Try our fellow member kgston for such services. I reckon he can do a much more professional job in ensuring quality than the rest of us.

 

[heshanj]

hey thanks for the reply! im trying to do a complete job of developing and scanning at home, trying to avoid getting it done outside. im fine with getting a pro to do it if i want very large prints etc, but for the uses that i mentioned in the first post, i'd like to try doing it at home.

so the 4990 seems good.. i see ur scans look great. how is it for a normal print, say 11x14? it is actually good that it can handle medium format as well, coz i might be digging into that in the future.

any tips on the canoscan 9000F? im debating between the two.. the canon is much newer so im wondering if its better in any way. there's only so much that reviews tell me, most of them praise these scanners for doing a good job, then point out a bunch of niggles that make me wonder if its good enough for me i know no product is perfect, but i'd like some expert opinions on these two scanners, and which one would be suited to my needs that i posted above.
thanks again!

 

[raytoei]

i started with canon scanner 8800 i think, i had to return and exchange for new one because it wasn't calibrated and was never sharp.
then i "upgraded" to an epson v600, i liked it very much. but then i became more and more demanding, after I attended a class on
darkroom printing, the images from silver print was so much richer than what was scanned.

then i learnt one truth about scanners, it isn't the dpi, it's the dmax (aka. max density, or how much shadows can you scan).

even the crappy 7 year old nikon coolscan with dpi of only 4000 beat the pants of v600. the reason is that the dmax on the coolscan is 4 while the v600 is only 3.4.

so.... long story short. go for higher dmax. And get a better printer too

the 4990 has a dmax of 4.0 while canon doesn't publish its dmax.

raytoei
err...anyone want to buy my epson v600 ?

 

[wootsk]

I don't really see too big a difference between those flatbed scanner in optical and sensor performance. The buy reason I can think of is that some has a holder for larger format support or better software or third party software provided. The cost and scanning speed are part of the factor as well. Most documented D range and limits from tech spec are about the scanner Analog to Digital convertor chip capability, not the actually CCD scanner capability.

Vege Bird.

Add on:
I did post some links about scanner in the past, if you want, you can visit them in the quote attached.
http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/traditional-darkroom/838792-scanner-choices-3.html#post6944401

 

[heshanj]

thanks for the replies again! now im starting to lean toward the epson 4990. yes, i read somewhere about dmax being more important than dpi too. so the 4990 has a very high(?) Dmax..

and about the software, is the epson scan software good enough? i dont mind spending a bit extra for silverfast or vuescan etc if its necessary, and it gives better results.

so based on the current replies, seems like a good flatbed like the 4990 should give me results good enough for my needs? no need for a dedicated film scanner..that would be good, coz i have no idea where to find a used affordable good one, where i am right now thanks again

 

[wootsk]

i started with canon scanner 8800 i think, i had to return and exchange for new one because it wasn't calibrated and was never sharp.
then i "upgraded" to an epson v600, i liked it very much. but then i became more and more demanding, after I attended a class on
darkroom printing, the images from silver print was so much richer than what was scanned.

then i learnt one truth about scanners, it isn't the dpi, it's the dmax (aka. max density, or how much shadows can you scan).

even the crappy 7 year old nikon coolscan with dpi of only 4000 beat the pants of v600. the reason is that the dmax on the coolscan is 4 while the v600 is only 3.4.

so.... long story short. go for higher dmax. And get a better printer too

the 4990 has a dmax of 4.0 while canon doesn't publish its dmax.

raytoei
err...anyone want to buy my epson v600 ?

Have to agree on the better printer part if TS is planning on a print which he should if he wants it as a photo.:bsmilie: Dedicated scanner have an advantage over flatbed if you are talking about DPI. A interesting question is that if you are scanning a stamp, will a 4000 DPI non macro glass scanner or a 3000 DPI with macro glass scanner produce better result? If everyone is planning on posting on facebook, then it is fine as they have resolution restriction in the first place, anything bigger is not suggested.

Vege Bird 2 cents.

 

[heshanj]

yeah, the printer is a whole new thing to research, i'll definitely look into that, i dont have any form of photo printer at the moment, so thats next.
so im definitely leaning towards the 4990, instead of the canon, and instead of a dedicated film scanner. keep the comments coming if there's more

EDIT: i noticed on another post, and did some research then, on the plusket 7600i SE. that seems to be a dedicated film scanner, for just a bit more than the 4990 or 9000F. any comments on this? i read a couple of reviews, which seem average.. but they seem to be comparing this scanner to other film scanners, not flatbeds.. so im wondering how the 7600i would compare to the 4990

 

[ellery]

Based on a US200 to topside USD300 budget you need to look at used dedicated film scanners. The big question is how high a quality you need ? Really high then you need a drum scanner and the software to run plus the expertise. A Howtech drum scanner (cheapest one that works) plus Phil Lifcorft (okay memory of the name if very iffy ) software to drive the howtech would set up back about US10K 12 years back. It is never just the cost is also the skill to do the scan that one is difficult to master like being a master silver halide printer the skill sets are similar.

Your other hope is find a photo finisher that still does film, their printer unit will be able to scan - get them to scan in high res their scanner well costs a lot more than what you can afford.

 

[wootsk]

Ok some sharing on dedicated and flatbed scanner. (We are not talking about drum and I don't really know where to start so I will try)

Beware as the below are more of the dark-side and if you are happy with what you have (like a V700), please do not read it. I'm Vege Bird and prefer my happiness life


Firstly, you have to understand that they uses CCD not PMT. That is the first factor you have to REMEMBER when you are looking at non drum scanner. By right, there are no difference in CCD scanner except a better CCD (CoolScan) and a not so good CCD. (Normal Flatbed) Sometime when I see people comparing 2 similar pricing DSLR by their sensor, I find it interesting as 2 people are comparing a not much difference APS-C sensor. So what is the main factor you will see in a dedicated scanner as compared to a flatbed scanner?

1. You can throw all tech spec about CCD scanner on the site out of window because most or all tech spec from seller about D values are MARKET value of the Analog to Digital chip capability. (Most or all of them never write the actual CCD capability because they know it is low) I've seem scanner specs that wrote 16bit grey output.:what: That means the scanner can scan till 4.8D. If we count by range, max is a 5.0, 4.8D is like too good for a $300 scanner.:what: Please click on link and read! Theoretically speaking, we can say that the darker area are important in scanning, but I have an example from a kind friend who did a D max and min test for me with his densitometer. End result is Dmin 0.27 Dmax 3.95. Please keep in mind that your LCD monitor doesn't not have the capability to display so high end spec even if you can scan them, but you do can pull out such detail with a photo editing software. In short, you cannot get such intensity as you view on a light box through a loupe, but you are able to PP such details out at least still you can print or view it on your monitor if you do need them.

2. A DEDICATED scanner has a DEDICATED scanning lens (for most on a decent cost) and a flatbed scanner doesn't. How good the lens is another story (Lets ask you that you have a 400 bucks dedicated scanner and a good macro lens cost around 250 bucks. So the rest cost 150 bucks? Think harder!) If you ask those who uses drum in the past, they will tell you that their lens are so sensitive that few μm difference can means a huge difference in scanning. So if you have a flatbed scanner producing up to 5000dpi, that are you seeing with the 5000dpi?

3. Efficiency of scanner software that comes with the scanner, freebie software, cost of scanner, supporting mounting plate so you lazy bumps do not need to DIY 1, freebies like printer or a soap bar, WARRENTY!!! and design of box and scanner. (Maybe)

4. Do you want to scan paper???

5. Speed of scanning is something general review from other sites came in useful. You have 36 exposure in a roll (up to 40 for a bulk loader), you won't want to use a tortoise if possible right?


Pardon me for the poor English as Vege Bird is still a noob.

 

[heshanj]

thanks a lot for the above post, thats very helpful. so it looks like, though the difference is clear between flatbeds and film scanners, i dont think that difference is vital to me (even if i could afford it ) and i think, based on wat ive seen on reviews etc, the 4990 does a good enough job. but, say i was looking for used film scanner.. wat would any of u recommend? something for the price i mentioned? something good enough to choose over the 4990. i saw a couple of used minolta dimage scanners for under USD250. finding them is another problem, but i'd like to know anyway. thanks

 

[anerjee]

I use the plustek. check my flickr stream for examples.

there are several reviews about this on the internet. The quality is quite good (comparable to the coolscans), but the software is a pain. it is also time consuming -- you need to advance each frame manually. it is suitable only if you are scanning low volume.

Plustek Optic Film 7600i-Ai Film Scanner Review

yeah, the printer is a whole new thing to research, i'll definitely look into that, i dont have any form of photo printer at the moment, so thats next.
so im definitely leaning towards the 4990, instead of the canon, and instead of a dedicated film scanner. keep the comments coming if there's more

EDIT: i noticed on another post, and did some research then, on the plusket 7600i SE. that seems to be a dedicated film scanner, for just a bit more than the 4990 or 9000F. any comments on this? i read a couple of reviews, which seem average.. but they seem to be comparing this scanner to other film scanners, not flatbeds.. so im wondering how the 7600i would compare to the 4990

 

[heshanj]

i dont mind if its on the slow side, i dont plan to be doing more than 1 or 2 film rolls at a time, and i can probably space it out. but on more research, i see that its pricier than i though, closer to USD400.. and ebay doesnt have any used ones.. maybe if i can find a used one, it might be an option. although im a bit concerned that it can only handle 35mm film, coz in case i decide somewhere along the line to shoot 120 film, it might be a problem. anyway, thanks for the reply, i'll definitely try finding a used plustek 7600i. btw, could u post a link to ur photostream, i'd like to see more examples of this scanner

 

[raytoei]

heshanj:

anerjee is right, the plustek is very nice BUT it is manually driven,
ie. every picture needs to be positioned to be scanned.
Compare this with a flatbed where 2 x 6 exposure can be scanned at the same time.

i like to scan 12 images at a same time and then wander off to do development, come back and then put another 12 images in.
if you get the epson 700, you can even put 4 x 6 at once. imagine the time saving..

raytoei

 

[wootsk]

heshanj:

anerjee is right, the plustek is very nice BUT it is manually driven,
ie. every picture needs to be positioned to be scanned.
Compare this with a flatbed where 2 x 6 exposure can be scanned at the same time.

i like to scan 12 images at a same time and then wander off to do development, come back and then put another 12 images in.
if you get the epson 700, you can even put 4 x 6 at once. imagine the time saving..

raytoei

I think that will depends. If TS is planning on scanning 1-2 rolls every week and putting on a restricted size media like facebook to share share with friends. (I don't know the idea for it, but that is the trend now -_-") Then a flatbed will be useful in a multiscan where resolution isn't there. If TS are those who just wants certain degree of performance and archieve something better, I will suggested a more dedicated single frame scanner.

 

[anerjee]

I have a different perspective. I find that I use about 1.5 hours to scan a roll + do the minimal pp I do. This is because I am working on scanned frames while scanning the next frame.

You may bulk scan entire 24 frames in one sitting, but you would need to come back and do your contrast and sharpening -- that adds up, and I don't think there is much time saving.

But manual frame advancing is a bit frustrating.


http://www.flickr.com/photos/pangmomo/

everything here is from the Plustek.

heshanj:

anerjee is right, the plustek is very nice BUT it is manually driven,
ie. every picture needs to be positioned to be scanned.
Compare this with a flatbed where 2 x 6 exposure can be scanned at the same time.

i like to scan 12 images at a same time and then wander off to do development, come back and then put another 12 images in.
if you get the epson 700, you can even put 4 x 6 at once. imagine the time saving..

raytoei

 

[heshanj]

thanks for the many replies. well, to clarify my main purpose of this scanner, i want to be able to view a fairly high res, good quality image, on my computer, to know how good (or bad) my photos from each roll are. i.e. i want to avoid having to go out n getting the film developed or printed, to know how my photos turned out. so yeah, i will probably be sharing some on facebook or flickr but its not my sole purpose.

i agree that flatbed scanning multiple frames at a time is definitely convenient.. but time is not vital for me, not as much as quality and price is hahah
but from wat ive gathered so far, a flatbed like the Epson, should be able to give me good enough quality for this purpose, right? i.e to view a high quality image on computer to see how my photos came out?

 

[sweat100]

thanks for the many replies. well, to clarify my main purpose of this scanner, i want to be able to view a fairly high res, good quality image, on my computer, to know how good (or bad) my photos from each roll are. i.e. i want to avoid having to go out n getting the film developed or printed, to know how my photos turned out. so yeah, i will probably be sharing some on facebook or flickr but its not my sole purpose.

i agree that flatbed scanning multiple frames at a time is definitely convenient.. but time is not vital for me, not as much as quality and price is hahah
but from wat ive gathered so far, a flatbed like the Epson, should be able to give me good enough quality for this purpose, right? i.e to view a high quality image on computer to see how my photos came out?

Yes, you are right, epson should be good enough for this purpose. I printed to A3 size before and I was satisfied. Currently using an epson 4870. However one thing I did not really like about the flat bed is that the film tend to curl under the heat of the scanning lamp. So if you are on your last strip, u will find that it is less sharp at the edges compared to if you scan the same image another day when the scanner is cooled. There is a time saving for flatbed, but this is the downside. You can overcome this problem by getting after market film holders with anti newton glass, but they are not cheap.

 

[heshanj]

oh i see. does this curling of the film damage negatives? or is it just a less sharp scan? and does this happen like after just a few strips, or after long periods of scanning? thanks for the info ive heard of buying separate film holders, but im not able to find exactly wat u mean online, is there any particular brand/model that i should be looking for?

 

[Achim Reh]

The big difference, or lets say, one of the more noticeable differences between flatbed scanners and dedicated film scanners is, that film scanners focus on the film....means, they ( or at least most of them) adjust precisely the distance between the the lens / sensor and the object surface. Flatbed scanners can not do this . There are some top range , which have an adjustable optic, but for most of them, is a fixed focus.