Scanners for Medium Format

<blockquote>

<p>There is a driver update for the Nikon 9000 and 8000 scanners so they work perfectly using Nikon Scan in Vista and Windows 7.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Seriously?<br>

I'd be extremely interested. Where can I find it? I cannot see it on NikonUsa website. :-?</p>

<p>From a quick P-Net 'Digital Darkroom' search.<br>

http://www.photo.net/digital-darkroom-forum/00Ryck<br>

http://axelriet.blogspot.com/2009/10/nikon-ls-40-ls-50-ls-5000-scanners-on.html</p>

<p>Sebastian.<br>

I have only used the Silverfast 6.6 version that came with my M1 Pro. I don't know what improvements have been made to version 8. But in comparison to the Epson Scan software (I have an Epson 4490 scanner), Vuescan (IMHO the worlds worst scanning software), and the Microtek Scan Wizard, Silverfast is a much more serious and complicated tool. <br>

As such, Silverfast has a steep learning curve BECAUSE it has so much granular control over what you can do with the scanner. However, the help system in silver fast does nothing to explain the functions in detail, which contributes to the steep slope of this learning curve. - SIGH . . . "Help" tells you "what" the menu options are (like you really need a video of somebody clicking on each menu item and reading what it says) - no really it is that stupid. <br>

Silverfast help and documentation doesn't really "define" what the terminology means. Fortunately there are third party tutorials - though I haven't gotten so desperate to go there yet.<br>

I've been using it for about 2 hours/day for a month and so far done 579 good scans. While I am certainly no expert in working with digital imaging, I do have significant computer technology formal education and 15 years of experience in the field of Information Technology. So consider that when I say the learning curve is steep, this is coming from my perspective as one who used to be the senior geek among geeks. ;-)</p>

<p>Thanks, Tom. Appreciate the comments. It sounds like Microtek is offering F2 which equals M2 plus Silverfast in the US.</p>

<p>Have you tried the calibration with the IT8 test targets. From other reading, it sounds like this has potential.</p>

<p>In my own scanning experience with the the V500, I'm getting pretty good scans, but getting good color from C-41 negatives has been hit-or-miss. The color in my sample image (linked in a previous post above) is OK, but it's still a lot easier to get good color with my DSLR. Would the IT8 calibration help give good color for C-41 scans? Anyone know?</p>

<p>Yes I did the IT8 calibration but that is for positives. IT8 calibration doesn't do anything for negatives as you're really working with a subjective color conversion process. The IT8 calibration is very easy to do in Silverfast once you figure out which direction to load the calibration slide they give you. LOL!</p>

 

<p>Thanks Tom. I feared that would be the case.</p>

<p>This describes the negative color correction program from Silverfast. <br>

<a href="http://www.silverfast.com/highlights/negafix/en.html">http://www.silverfast.com/highlights/negafix/en.html</a></p>

<p>Thanks, Tom. Appreciated. I had been confusing Silverfast's negafix with another product, colorneg. Glad to have this straighten out.</p>

<p>Adorama has the Pacific Image 120 at $1400. Don't know much about this one, but it might be worth googling for reviews.</p>

 

<p>Pacific Image - the "Holga" of film scanners. </p>

<p>Tom:<br />I read your comments on the Microtek F2 with some degree of interest. I currently have a Minolta Scan Multi Pro which I love but it is getting long in the tooth and obvioulsy is no longer supportable. I also have an EPSON 3200 which hasn't been used in years.</p>

<p>I'm currently considering the Minolta replacment which up until I read this thread was mainly focused on the Plustek 120. Have you tried it with 35mm negs and/or slides? I also scan the occasional 4 x 5 and it should shine there</p>

<p>Do you really think the Microtek gets ~4000 dpi real resolution and a 4+ DR? If it does, then it is a steal<br>

I take it you think it is far better than the Epson 750pro. I'm not enamoured of wet scanning.</p>

<p>Anyway just following up on your thoughts and basically seeking to expand my horizons<br>

Cheers<br>

Tim</p>

<p>Has anyone noticed that the Pacific Image medium format film scanner is no longer listed at BHPhoto? Strange.</p>

<p>The image I posted of the black cat earlier in the thread is from a 35mm negative. The closeup is a crop at full 4800dpi resolution straight from the scanner. Next set of images of the horse I posted were from 6x6cm negative. Again the closeup of the eye is full 4800dpi resolution without any unsharp mask. I have done lower resolution scans at 2400 and 3200 ant then upscaled them in photoshop with bicubic sampling for comparison. The 4800dpi native scans are sharper than the upscaled images. Whether or not it is as sharp as a Nikon at 4000dpi or a Minolta at 5400dpi I have no way to make a comparison. The Microtek does appear to resolve the grain of the film and I've found some rather embarrasing focusing errors in a lot of images that I thought I had gotten it right.<br>

I also have an Epson 4490 scanner which is rated at 4800dpi native. Trust me, it is NOT 4800 and unless the film is spot on perfectly exposed it won't pick up shadow detail at 3.2D.<br>

One more example of 4800dpi - cropped. If I printed the whole image at 300dpi it would be 34" x 34" what you see on your screen is representative of a 3" section cropped from what would be that 34" print. Remember your monitor is only displaying something between 72 and 100 dpi so the crop you are viewing is spread out over a larger area than it would be on a 300dpi print.<br>

<img src="http://blackburnforge.com/images/Image0083.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>What do you think?</p>

<p>The original image down scaled so you can see what I cropped.<br>

<img src="http://blackburnforge.com/images/Image0083nc.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>In regard to the 4+DR. I can only say if it is on the film this thing will scan it. I've rescued some slides that you can't see any image detail on a light table - like 3 or 4 stops underexposed.<br>

Here's one that I scanned at 9600dpi and 48bit HDR and then pulled up 3 or 4 stops. The crop is the tip of the horse's left ear at 9600dpi. My Epson 4490 couldn't even get an image of anything but the backlit outline of the horse. It appears that 9600dpi may be a fuzzy stretch, but I can't see a difference when downsampling from 9600 to 4800 vs. 4800 native. I really thing anything over 5000 dpi is pushing the limits of CCD technology, not to mention film and lenses hitting their MTF limits. <br>

<img src="http://blackburnforge.com/images/Image0069nc.jpg" alt="" /><br>

<img src="http://blackburnforge.com/images/Image0069.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>Hey Tim,<br>

How about I send you some film to scan with your Minolta and before sending it I'll scan it with my Microtek and dump the 48bit TIFF file on a CD. I would be really cool to see how the two machines stack up using the exact same piece of film. I can pick something that's badly under exposed - something I'm an expert at doing due to many years of practice.</p>

<p>You guys are all very awesome. Thanks again for all of your help!</p>

<p>I just went through this attempting to scan my 120 negs and transparencies. Tried my Epson 700 and it didn't cut it. Filmholders are usually blamed. I purchased a Better Scanning upgraded film holder but have not used it. Better Scanning makes an excellent quality holder and infinitely height adjustable. Oddly, the Epson seems to do much better with 35mm slides and 4x5 film.<br /> I discovered a rental photo lab in the Los Angeles (Translight) area that rents a Nikon 9000 for $25 an hour. I scanned several hours worth and got good results. At my production level on 4000 dip scans, net cost was about $3 a scan plus time spent, gas etc.<br /> Then I found a pro photographer who will do the same scans on his Nikon 8000 for $6 each. Due to time and other constraints I had Morey Milbradt scan a lot of negs and transparencies for me. <br />Here is his web site if you decide to to this route. Morey did a good job with fast turn around and it sped up my getting into processing the images quickly. He's located in Phoenix. http://about.me/mmilbradt<br /> Older Nikon scanners have trouble working with newer operating systems but upgraded scan software is available from Vuescan for a reasonable price and it works with OSx and Windows. <br /> I guess one option is to buy a Nikon 8000 or 9000, upgrade the software, scan your brains out and sell it when you are done. I've seen them on Ebay. Assuming you have at least a couple hundred images to scan, you could take a hit on the Nikon coolscan resale and still come out ahead. <br /> All depends on how much trouble and how much cost you want to throw into it. Good Luck</p>