120 film scanner (Epson V700/V750)

Hi All,

<br><br>

and again a question that might already be answered, have read through a couple

posts, but thought I have to post anyway ...

<br><br>

Am planning to get the epson v700 mf scanner to reduce the cost of developing

for an upcoming shoot (20+ rolls, the guy basically told me i'd be looking at

~2000 GBP for development and scan @ 2400dpi).

<br><br>

Well, the shoot is commissioned and for a lifestyle magazine, so would like to

get as sharp images as possible. It looks as if the v700 is the only scanner

that's somewhat affordable for me.

<br><br>

Does anybody have example pictures (full res) so I could have a look at what the

V700 can produce ? I already read about the software and possibly get SilverFast

Ai IT8 Studio as well to ensure I get the as much out of the scans as the

software/scanner can get.

<br><br>

I'd really love to see a full res image (preferably with a person so I can see

how the skin-tone, etc. is being reproduced), I'll use 6x4.5 format, which,

scanned at 2400dpi, should give me a 22mpx (ish) image. Anyone disagree ?

<br><br>

Oh, there's talk about V750 Pro and "wet scanning" - what exactly does that mean ?

<br><br>

Thanks in advance!!<br><br>

Alex<br>

http://www.ale-photo.com

<br>

At 16 shots per roll, your 20 rolls get you just over 320 frames to scan. Better lay in a

supply of popcorn, and get a comfortable chair. I'm not sure about British prices, but 2000

GBP seems ridiculously high for processing and scanning. In the US, that would buy you

two Nikon 9000 film scanners with glass negative holders.

 

There's no reason to scan EVERY image at 2400 dpi. You'd scan them all, or at least your

selection of the most promising ones, at lower resolution; and then rescan the ones the

client chooses at the higher resolution for final delivery. Even better, if you are shooting

transparencies, would be for your client to make his/her selections on a light table, and

then scan those at high resolution.

 

I assume your client knows you are working with film, so the additional time and charges

for processing and scanning, whether done by you or by a third party, won't come as an

unwelcome surprise. You are planning to recoup this expense, I trust? If you have no

experience scanning film, be aware that there is a learning curve involved if you plan on

delivering the highest quality scans. It's not impossibly steep, but it will take time.

 

Scanned at 2400 PIXELS--not DOTS--per inch, your 645 negative will yield roughly 5700

x 4250 pixels, or about 24 megapixels. It's a matter of much debate how, or whether, 24

scanned-film MP's equates to 24 digital-capture MP's, so I'll leave that dogfight for

others. (I shoot both film and digital so I'm not a chauvinist for either.) If you consider that

180-240 ppi is the minimum resolution necessary for an acceptable final print, you are

looking at somewhere around 24-32 inches in the long dimension as your maximum print

size--assuming you are delivering prints.

 

I have used neither the V700 nor the V750, so I can't speak to that part of your question. I

use the Nikon 8000, a dedicated MF film scanner, the predecessor of the 9000 I

mentioned above. I think in general a dedicated scanner is the way to get the best

possible quality when scanning film, short of the drum scanner option you apparently

looked into already.

 

"Wet scanning" is a process by which the negative is immersed in a solution and scanned,

eliminating Newton rings and making dust and scratches less obvious, and reportedly

improving sharpness. I have never tried it, because it sounds like a godawful mess and

because I've been happy with my results just dry-scanning.

I have one and i'd be glad to send you a sample or upload it to a server.<div></div>

Wow! That's about 100GBP or $200/roll! That's more that ten times what my very pricy (but very convenient) pro lab charges. Perhaps you should shop around.

I'm still climbing the learning curve with the V700 and Silverfast, but it's getting there. Don't expect to teach yourself in a day.

 

What eats my time is the spotting ... getting rid of dust etc. Ugh! And yes, as mentioned, first do low/medium res scans as a 'preview', then go for the high res scans on the short-listed, best images only.

 

Not sorry I bought the V700, but will also get into wet scans when time permits. There's a load of stuff to read here on Photo.net. so spending some time going through it and visiting the suggested links will be very helpful.

 

I'm investing heaps of time with this, and the most rewarding aspect is being able to take control.

 

Cheers, Kevin.

"dpi" has been used with scanners before Photoshop was born. "2400 dpi" is a common scan setting with an epson flatbed for a MF negative; typically all they will really support.You get a 2400 pixel per inch image in photoshop. dpi is used in patent literature with scanners before photoshop was born; its used in 99 percent of software software on the planet. Its was around in scanning with DOS programs; before photoshop. Saying "dpi" is improper with scanners is odd; its like saying "film" is improper; one shoots "rolls of analog":).

"(20+ rolls, the guy basically told me i'd be looking at ~2000 GBP for development and scan

@ 2400dpi). "

 

And I thought Finland was an expensive country...

Are you sure you didn't misunderstand something here?

Alex

 

I'm pretty sure that the cost is so high because you have , whether inadvertently or not, asked the lab to do something they don't usually do. People don't usually volunteer to pay for scans on expensive machines unless they know they have a critical application in view for that frame. ?100 per roll is not a usual or reasonable amount for a basic "develop and scan" service. I use a pro lab in central London that charges at list ?25 to process a 120 roll and scan to CD at 6.4 mb- which is more than fine for showing a client. From slides its ?5 more. Besides which if you are a pro you'll get a discount and pay less. I have no doubt you could find it cheaper, but they are pretty quick, and decent quality.

 

I presume that you're aware that you might have to do a little work on the scans to get them how you want them? It is not a given that a scan is going to look just like a print you haven't had made yet!

 

The basic idea is that you show the client either trannies (if thats what you shoot); small prints; or scans from a CD sized to fit a computer screen. Then when the client selects those he wants to use and you get those originals scanned to support that application. Its much cheaper if you avoid expensive or custom work on images he isn't going to use. You never- or at least rarely- need "as sharp as possible". You need a quality scan made to support how the client is going to use it, and your client should have given you a spec of how they need to receive their scanned images for printing.

You can look at some of the photos in my Photo.net portfolio. The ones shot with film were, all scanned with the V750. As far as Silver Fast, I would stick with the Epson software.

Alex:

 

The reaon why your lab qoute such a high scanning price is probably done by hand with a Nikon 9000 or Imacon.

 

However there are full roll 120 high resolution scanner which scans 120 by the roll which are more automated.

 

My lab has one of these and they do 3200dpi scan on uncut 120 rolls for about $80 per roll of 16 6X4.5 in the former colonies.

Hi All!

<br><br>

Thank you soooo much for all your replies! Yes, 2000 gbp seemed ridiculously high so he "changed" his offer .. now "only" 72GBP per film roll (16frames - 2400dpi) .. and about 9gbp per roll for development only.

<br><br>

I have to admit - making a small scan first to let them check out what they'd like to use makes perfectly sense - I should have thought of that in the first place! But well, sometimes you cant see the most obvious :) .. you know that saying "....not to see the wood for the trees".

<br><br>

Hmm.. not sure about the "getting practice" thing - "according to reviews" it's explained to be quite simple .. oh, and found that the hight adjuster for the mount should be set to 3.5mm instead of the default 3mm to get a sharper scan :) .. but I guess to really get the best results, exactly as I'd like to get them, one really has to have scanned and tweaked for a little while ..

<br><br>

Well, "wet scanning" is possibly not really my thing, at least not yet and unless I need a scan to get a print of the size of my wall it'll be fine :) .. assuming that a wet scan will make the scanned image "good enough" to do so anyway ;) ..

<br><br>

<i>

@David Henderson<br>

Thanks very much for your reply - am only just starting to use film, up until now I've always shot digitally (well, last time I shot film is 10years back or so), so am new to MF and MF-Film ;) ... I've got a membership that could get me some discounts, though not with the guy I usually use to get my prints done. Which Lab/Labs could you recommend for development & processing (scanning) in the London area ?

Got confused about the "trannies" thing :) .. you know s.th. else relates to that too =) .. but got you after re-reading it ;) .. I shoot neg. film, btw.

<br><br>

The client has given me a "basic guideline" of what they need for printing, i.e. size, dpi and color spec (usually cmyk anyway). I usually supply them with the end result (i.e. retouched, sharpened, etc. tiff - it's all done for them, ready to use the images as I supply them).

</i><br><br>

 

<i>@Tinko Czetwertynksi<br>

Thanks Tinko! Quite a nice shot ;) ! My mail account doesnt usually have a limit, so feel free to send it to info@ale-photo.com .. Thanks!</i>

<br><br>

 

Thanks to everyone! <br>

Alex<br>

http://www.ale-photo.com<br>

Hi Alex

 

I don't know anything about scanning, but heck ?2000 (wow) I looked at colab (one vision) and it is only ?4.45 before vat for processing only. There is also a pricelist download page, you enter your e mail details and they send you a current price list. On it is a list for scanning your pics. Hope this helps

 

Alan

Alex

 

The lab I use in London is Bayeux, 78 Newman Street (Just north of Oxford Street between Tottenham Court Road and Oxford Circus). I guess they can do everything most pro labs can do and I've known these guys for years since they were all at another lab. You'll need to speak to Terry Hack, normally behind the desk, or Robin Bernard the MD. Tel 0207 436 1066. They are used to working in fashion, as you might guess from their location. www.bayeux.co.uk

 

Best of luck with it. I would never discourage anyone from buying a decent flatbed; but to scan 320 negs on something you've yet to learn and under the time/quality presures of a commercial project isn't something I'd want to do.

Wet scanning yields more perceived detail, but adds more time & cost to each frame. Add in your time to manage the post-shoot labor, and you may be able to justify the long-term investment of a dedicated medium-format scanner.

You might also look into renting time on an Imacon. From my brief experience watching

one in action, they are pretty speedy (certainly much faster than my Epson V750!) and you

can save an FFF file which works like a RAW file from a camera so that you can fiddle with

it later (be sure to get a copy of the Flexcolor application!) None of the foolishness the

Epson makes you go through with the film holders, etc. to get the best results, either.

 

Alternatively, take a pile of negatives down to your local Hasselblad dealer and say you

want an in-depth demonstration :-)

 

Add me to the chorus of folks who think this will be a challenging endeavor!

Hi All !

<br><br>

<i>@David Henderson<br>

Thanks so much for the contact details!! Very appreciated!! I'll mention you as a referral, maybe you'll get some free processing or so :) ..

<br><br>

<i>@Jeff, <br>

thanks for explaining - I suppose I dont "really" need to go into wet scanning quite yet ;) ... seems very time consuming, which, especially after a fashion shoot, I dont really have available quite yet</i>

<br><br>

<i>@Bill Palmer, <br>

That "in-depth demonstration" is a very good idea actually :D .. I just got an account with "The ProCentre" and they rent out time on their Hassy scanner .. hmmm, i might have a look at that too ..

</i></i>

<br><br>

Oh - and I like challenges ! :D But have to agree, it might be a little too much for me to learn in that small timeframe, so possibly going to go for the Lab option for this one .. :)

<br><br>

Thanks so much to all of you!!

<br><br>

Alex<br>

http://www.ale-photo.com

Here is my test:

 

http://shutterclick.smugmug.com/gallery/4509304_envFS#265449740

 

The Epson V500 captures only a small fraction of the detail in the film. I will post the same scan with the Coolscan 9000 next week for comparison.

 

It is worth noting that even a quick flatbed scans comfortably outperforms the detail of a 10MP DSLR (Canon 40D).

And of course your "test" is very objective isnt it? running a business I see? think you might be a little biased? against flatbeds?

 

Although the v500 isnt included it has only slightly lower DMAX than the v750.

 

Here is a link to some objective comparisons. Near the bottom of the page the V700 is compared to the LS8000. A fairer, more objective than comparison than yours.

 

http://www.terrapinphoto.com/jmdavis/ evidently the epson holds up quite well.