sven_jolly

<p>Peter, thank you for uploading images. Both are good. I honestly think I see less grain in the plustek scanner. I see grain in your mid-tones (unless thats' Fomapan behavior), more than a traditional ISO 100 film would show. I rencently scanned Kentmere 100 and it was still looking like I developed in Rodinal. I honestly believe the source of abnormal grain is magnified by the V500.<br> I'm going to try a ANR glass tomorrow and see if that will help. </p>

<p>Hey Charles, thanks for the reply. I've tried all of this. Everyt variation in Epson Scan. Scanning in Color-48bit seemed to be the only semi-decent workaround but is still bad. It seems that one culprit (among many) could be the cheap-o film holder (which some B/W curls too much). I'm looking into ANR glass to remedy this but I have little faith in this scanner.<br> <br /><br /><br> I've seen scans from medium format that looked pleasing but I don't think this scanner handles 35mm well at all. </p>

<p>Peter, you seem to be quite the know-it-all but I've yet to see any photos other than 1 sample image from your scanning (aside from the guy dressed as an animal) which I thought was not a very good scan. Why is it that you're commenting on all of these forum posts and not putting your money where your mouth is? Perhaps you have nothing better to do...</p> <p>I'm thinking my standards for B/W scanning are far better than yours (along with a lot of other people online). It doesn't take a rocket scientist to google V500 Black and white samples and see that the scans are less than stellar and that many photographers are having trouble getting satisfactory results from the V500. Why else would people be dumping oil on their scanners or build some makeshift wet scanning device/buy some aftermarking ANR glass and holders?</p> <p>Why are you defending the V500? Are you attempting to justify your purchase? The scans I've made and other people's scans are coming out overtly grainy (appearing like they were devenoped in rodinal). I've also tried every variable with Epson Scan and they are still coming out awrful.</p> <p>I don't think this scanner is capable of handling B/W 35MM negatives and as I stated before, many other folks feel the same way. I have yet to use a modern, dedicated scanner, but the Plustek seems to be the only decent alternative based on my current budget. Anything would be better than this glorified paper weight. </p> <p>I use fuji X100 cameras for my digital work and I doubt even with the 5mm conversion lens that this is a possibilty so digital copying is out as a solution.</p>

<p>Peter, I just started scanning within the past 10 years after a digital takeover. It was common knowledge back in the day that flatbeds had too many issues and since we're now into the digital era, it appears as if you either have to stumble upon a noritsu or frontier or use a nikon coolscan to get great results. Mostly all entry level flatbeds scanners aren't worth their weight. You're looking at common grain issues, sharpness issues and etc with the V500. There are plenty of V500 test images that show these issues and from what I've seen, takes major work arounds to get a decent scan.</p> <p>I've seen that you've chimed in here a lot with scanners and I'd ask you to please post some sample images to show you're getting great results with the V500, with B/W 35MM. I'm using Epson scan and have tried vuescan. Vuescan doesn't appear to have the control that Epson scan has. Have you used any ANR glass?<br> <br /><br /></p> <p> </p>

<p>Hey Guys, thank you for all the answers! I will analyze all of them tomorrow and move according to the results and make some replies tomorrow with my findings.</p> <p>Len, these scanners are notoriously garbage for B/W scanning. From what I've seen, there are work arounds with aftermarket ANR glass and even wet scanning, but it appears most flatbed scanners are not ideal for converting black and white. We're talking grain issues, sharpness issues and etc. Please look further into this, online. You'll see the general consensus is that most people have issues scanning with flatbed scanners as it is, much less B/W. </p>

<p>Ok morons, I've about had it with these replies in researching the same issues as the OP. You guys need to not reply to these Postings if you don't have direct advice.</p>

<p>Hi All,</p> <p>I've been pouring over the forums (some postings from over a decade ago). I need advice on a used, inexpensive (can be older) B/W film scanner that would be available on Ebay or Amazon. I'm not looking for advice on how good your Nikon Coolscan is as They're still roughly 500-2000, used. This type of advice seems to be common here. <br /> <br />I'm looking to part with this awful Flatbed Scanner V500 and get a dedicated film scanner. Please only reply if you've had experience with a specific scanner and can elaborate on your results with B/W negative scanning at 35mm. I don't scan anything other than 35mm.</p> <p>Apologies about being so stern but there are so many replies via other people's postings with stupid replies that don't pertain to the OP questions. As of now, the plustek 7200 is looking like the only alternative (under 100). Also, said scanner needs to work with win 10!</p> <p>To summarize, please reply only if (I want to keep this thread decluttered for others):<br> <br />You scan b/w 35mm film<br> You have owned or own a designated film scanner that is relatively inexpensive (no used coolscans)<br> The scanner will work with Win 10<br> Thanks!</p>

<p>William, do you do any research before posting advice? I'm just curious as to how you'd recommend such a crappy scanner?</p>

<p>I see! Thanks for the reply. Also, I'm also curious how exposure compensation would work with the flash... </p>

<p>Hello,<br /> <br />Can someone who's familiar with the Contax G series TLA-200 please explain how the flash works as well as the settings on the top of the flash ? I can't seem to find an english manual anywhere. <br /> <br />It's my understanding that in full auto mode (aperture priority, (g1/g2) that the flash with TTL shoots like a point and shoot, and compensates based on ambient light and Aperture to properly expose the scene. <br /> What do the Guide Numbers do on the flash? They seem to correspond with the focal distances of the available lenses for the G series?</p> <p>Thanks, <br /> Warren</p>

<p>I think I'm going to move to a lower speed film until I get everything perfect. Might have to look at a V6-700 as some point as well. Looks like This scanner doesn't work well with HP5 Scans.</p>

<p>It appears as if I've solved the issue with the V500. It appears that any tweaking inside the exposure/contrast/etc really boosts the grain. Attached is a scan I made with 48-bit Color (recommended based on an article I read online).<br> <br />Attached is a re-edit with the V500 scan. The grain has died down substantially. And yes, was using SRGB or ADOBE. <br> <br />Thanks guys and Charles. </p><div></div>

<p>Charles, do you mean a negative from the scanner directly?</p> <p>I uploaded one on the previous page.</p> <p>Also, I'm running a Calibrated Samsung 4k UHD28 monitor.</p>

<p>Charles, </p> <p>What Settings are you using for Epson scan on your V700? Is it the same light source?</p>

<p>Hey Guys, I think Charles hit the nail on the head.</p> <p>I just re-scanned some older strips and there's an insane amount of grain on the 10 year old rolls of tmax. Looks like it's definitely the scanner causing the grain issue. </p>