basil brush Posted August 1, 2004 Share Posted August 1, 2004 Does anyone use an Epson Perfection 2400 (or another in the series) for scanning slides? I'm very happy with the results from scanning prints, but disappointed with scans from mouned slides. I have trawled the web for info about this, and the consensus seems to be that the elevation off the glass caused by the mount means that the focus is off. I'd like to find out if there is any way of correcting this. At the moment I am trying to convince myself that the slightly soft focus look has a certain appeal, but 80% of the time it doesn't. Does anyone have suggestions for an alternative flatbed + transparency scanner which gives sharp results from mounted slides, or is a dedicated film scanner the only way to go? Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomas_sullivan Posted August 1, 2004 Share Posted August 1, 2004 in my opinion any 35mm slide, negative (color or black and white) needs a dedicated film scanner..........period. Its not until medium format that scanning on a flatbed is even remotely acceptable. I dont really believe that the soft image you are getting has to do with focus. Its just the resolution limitations of a flatbed as compared to a dedicated scanner. I own the Epson 1640su and a dedicated Nikon LS2000 scanner...........world of difference with 35mm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jay_. Posted August 1, 2004 Share Posted August 1, 2004 I have a 2450. It is abysmally inadequate for 35mm and compared to my ancient Polaroid 45, very disappointing with 6x6 as well. The problem isn't resolution (my Polaroid is 2000 dpi)it's the dmax. I've relegated my 2450 to scanning prints and documents. I've been considering the 4800 dpi model but I've seen so many mixed reviews, I've decided to wait until I can find somebody who's got one and try it out before I buy. It's pretty pricey if it ends up being a paper scanner too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotografz Posted August 1, 2004 Share Posted August 1, 2004 I agree with Thomas. I'm currently using a Minolta 5400 dedicated film scanner. I recently replaced my 1640SU flatbed with an Epson 4870 Photo which is even better, and it's still better to use the 5400. The 4870 is more than enough for MF, even 645, but for 35mm get a dedicated version. It doesn't have to be a 5400ppi scanner, 4000 or even 3200 is plenty as long as it's dedicated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
basil brush Posted August 1, 2004 Author Share Posted August 1, 2004 Thanks for your repsones. This pretty much confirms what I thought / feared. Other than the those mentioned (although I don't know their prices), are there any recommendations for dedicated film scanners under ?500 GBP? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_brewton Posted August 1, 2004 Share Posted August 1, 2004 Marc and Jay are correct. I have an HP flat bed with a 35mm adapter. It was abysmal with 35. It is now relegated to copying documents and some prints. I have a Minolta 5400 and am very pleased with the results. As I mostly print b/w I use a HP 7960 (see Michael Johnston's columns on Luminous Landscape) and I also like the printing software which came with it for a final "tweak" before printing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brambor Posted August 1, 2004 Share Posted August 1, 2004 I have a Minolta Dimage 3 (I think). It was not too expensive. Besides scanning about 1 stop darker I have been happy with the unit. I wish it scanned 6X6 but that's another thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuart_richardson Posted August 1, 2004 Share Posted August 1, 2004 I have a Minolta Scan Dual III. It is an excellent scanner. For any scanner, there is a bit of a learning curve to getting the best results (I know I am still learning...), but out of the box I have been able to get great images with the minolta. The one trick I learned for black and white was to scan it in as a black and white positive and inverse it in photoshop. For some reason this gives much better results than the other way around. Minolta makes the best price/performance scanners. Even new, this scanner was 300 dollars or so. I am selling it now if you want it. I will give it to you for 130 bucks, but being named Basil, I expect you are in the U.K. (Despite being named Stuart, I am not from Scotland, but the U.S. ) I upgraded to the Minolta Scan Multi-Pro, because I entered medium format and it was the best way to scan 6x7 and 6x9 negatives. <P> For more scanning tips, you might try going to http://www.scantips.com/ It is a useful and comprehensive site for advice on scanning. If I remember correctly, it can also get a bit technical... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
larry_kincaid1 Posted August 1, 2004 Share Posted August 1, 2004 Nice of the film scanners to tell us flatbed scanners that we have to buy another machine, but that was not the question. When I bought my 3200 Epson for $ 266, apart from knowing a better one was about to be reseased, I knew I would have to buy another one for negatives and slides. But I still have too many old photographs without negatives to scan before moving to a film scanner. Meanwhile, are there any tips from anyone about how to enhance the slide scans or negative scans we might try to make on the better flatbeds? Or perhaps web sites that might help? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kent_tolley2 Posted August 1, 2004 Share Posted August 1, 2004 I'm convinced a dedicated film scanner would do better for slides than a flatbed. This though was scanned with an Epson 3200 and it seems ok. <center><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/2575856-lg.jpg"></center> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kent_tolley2 Posted August 1, 2004 Share Posted August 1, 2004 Provia slide scanned on Epson 3200 <center><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/2540490-lg.jpg"></center> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsr Posted August 1, 2004 Share Posted August 1, 2004 35mm film scanners simply have more resolution than a flatbed and there's no point in arguing about it. If you think the mount is causing focus problems, try cutting a slide out of its mount, scan it and see if the image is sharper. You can use a "throw away" for this test and if your results are good you can remount your slides after scanning. Slide mounts are available at camera shops. Still, I think you need a film scanner. BTW, that Pelican scan is excellent, unbelievable!! Best regards, Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kent_tolley2 Posted August 1, 2004 Share Posted August 1, 2004 I think Marc G has a tutorial on scanning somewhere on PhotoNet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kent_tolley2 Posted August 1, 2004 Share Posted August 1, 2004 Actually his tutorial in on another site but you can go there without being a member. <A HREF="http://photopoints.com/main/article/article.aspx?id=13">Marc?s Tutorial on sizing and sharpening</A>-- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
love4leica Posted August 2, 2004 Share Posted August 2, 2004 Jay and others - Epson 4870 is very nice scanner to handle slides and col/BW negs as well. We have seen 2 examples of bird shots done on 3200 and they are excellent- just imagine how much better they would come out on Epson 4870. A friend of mine scans Xpan slides (24mm X 65mm) and produces prints on Epson Printer 2100 ( 2200 in the USA) which are fantastic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsbc Posted August 2, 2004 Share Posted August 2, 2004 The 3200 slides seems better than what I can achieve - are the films 135 or 120? I get decent quality on screen when I scan my MF slides on my Epson 3200, but the details just aren't there when I zoom in. I think the biggest problem with the Epson is not jsut resolution, but Dmax and color fidelity. Looking at the pelican and the other bird slide (particularly the latter) it seems a lot of work is done post-scanning to eke these vibrant colors. Scanning it in 16-bit does not help (don't know whether it is a software or hardware issue). I have a Coolscan V which has a clipped color range, but even then I think the colors are so much better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kent_tolley2 Posted August 2, 2004 Share Posted August 2, 2004 Both birds are 35mm Provia 100 slides scanned in their slide holders. No PS work needed other than the regular balancing levels, and brightness with progressive down-sizing and USM in incremental amounts between each resize.<BR><BR> Before you scrap your suspect scanner I recommend you perfect your scanning and PS technique. There is a chain of events and processes leading to the final print. I suspect that he's looking for a quick, new-hardware-solves-everything fix and he could actually improve his scanning technique regardless of the HW.<BR><BR>My point is if you're not getting this quality out of an Epson 3200 or equivalent it's not your hardware that is to blame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
basil brush Posted August 3, 2004 Author Share Posted August 3, 2004 Kent, I'm only looking for a quick fix if my current setup if "broken". I'm more than willing to entertain the idea that I can do more with my Epson flatbed. I think your bird scans look great. Are you saying that you have only used a modest amount of sharpening? I'm not completely ignorant of PS techniques, but lots of USM looks poor to me, and modest amounts still end up looking like this: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
basil brush Posted August 3, 2004 Author Share Posted August 3, 2004 Repost with a bloody caption.<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kent_tolley2 Posted August 3, 2004 Share Posted August 3, 2004 It looks soft around her eyes and face but it's sharp on her head scarf. Did you focus on her eyelashes? Are you autofocus? What system? You have to look at the whole chain. What made you narrow your choice to the scanner? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjk Posted September 4, 2004 Share Posted September 4, 2004 Here's a picture taken with F100/Provia scanned on an Epson 4870...<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjk Posted September 4, 2004 Share Posted September 4, 2004 Here's a picture taken with F100/Provia scanned on an Epson 4870.sorry...this is smaler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
r s Posted September 4, 2004 Share Posted September 4, 2004 I have an Epson 3200 scanner as well but never been completely happy with it and can't wait until I upgrade to a dedicated film scanner. It's not that the 3200 is bad - it's just that it's not as good as a dedicated film scanner. Even my HP Photosmart S20 (that now have gone to heaven) bought in 1999 for 2-300 dollars beats the 3200 bought in 2003 for 500 dollars. <br><br> Here are some sames of scans from the 3200, different cameras, formats and film:<br><br> <center><i><img src="http://www.pbase.com/image/17471865.jpg"><br> Hasselblad, 120, Tmax 400 <br> <br> <img src="http://www.pbase.com/image/19624645.jpg"><br> Hasselblad, 120, Tmax 400 <br> <br> <img src="http://www.pbase.com/image/18182974.jpg"><br> Hasselblad, 120, Provia 100F <br> <br> <img src="http://www.pbase.com/image/32674466.jpg"><br> Leica M3, 135, Tri-X 400 <br> <br> <img src="http://www.pbase.com/image/30861221.jpg"><br> Leica M3, 135, Fuji Neopan 400 <br> <br> </i> </center> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjk Posted September 4, 2004 Share Posted September 4, 2004 I don't know...the 3200 looks pretty good to me... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stock-Photos Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 You original request was for slide scanning tips. I've published a page about exactly that. Although, it is a work in progress. http://www.sslidescanning123.com/tips/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now