Epson Perfection v700 questions

I've been scanning for over ten years using both Epson V600 and V850 scanners on 35mm, 120, and 4x5 chromes, negative color, and BW film. . Unlike some others here, I've shown the results of my scans on my Flickr page linked below. I'll let viewers judge my experience with scanning rather than listen to others who have an axe to grind about SilverFast and who show little or no scans at all.

Wow, 10 years with one software product?

Read: learn, then post:

http://digitaldog.net/files/ScannerInterfaces.pdf

Unfortunately, I've seen the results of your scanning as have others. Again, you have much to learn before providing advice to others about scanning software at a minimum sir!

Alan, If you can wrap your head around the first article on scanning, circa 1999, move directly to:

http://digitaldog.net/files/Scanningtutorial.pdf

That was published a year earlier, again a peer-reviewed article from the technical editor of Photo Electronic Imaging and Professional Photographer magazine. A fellow who reviewed dozens of scanners in both magazines and owned dozens of scanners from PMT drum down, for real photographers in a service bureau he owned no less!

And since you told your audience 'all original prints are 300dpi', (absurd of course) this old article on resolution comes next: http://digitaldog.net/files/Resolution.pdf

“Being ignorant is not so much a shame, as being unwilling to learn.” -Benjamin Franklin

Wow, 10 years with one software product?

Read: learn, then post:

http://digitaldog.net/files/ScannerInterfaces.pdf

Unfortunately, I've seen the results of your scanning as have others. Again, you have much to learn before providing advice to others about scanning software at a minimum sir!

Yes, olde wise one. Only you have Knowledge and Truth. Everyone else here are just dummies.

Alan, If you can wrap your head around the first article on scanning, circa 1999, move directly to:

http://digitaldog.net/files/Scanningtutorial.pdf

That was published a year earlier, again a peer-reviewed article from the technical editor of Photo Electronic Imaging and Professional Photographer magazine. A fellow who reviewed dozens of scanners in both magazines and owned dozens of scanners from PMT drum down, for real photographers in a service bureau he owned no less!

And since you told your audience 'all original prints are 300dpi', (absurd of course) this old article on resolution comes next: http://digitaldog.net/files/Resolution.pdf

“Being ignorant is not so much a shame, as being unwilling to learn.” -Benjamin Franklin

Who cares about an article from 1999? Time to update it. Post-editing software like Lightroom and others have come a long way since then and are better than making edits with the scan software. Frankly, it's easier to do all editing in post-editing program rather than learning editing in a second and complicated scanning program like Silverfast or Epsonscan for that matter. I've found scanning flat and applying edits afterward is simpler and better. First off, you don't have to learn a second editing program if you scan flat. Scan only. More importantly, scanning flat means you only have to scan once. If you edit with the scanner program for the scan, and the scan results are not quite right, you have to waste time scanning again. Better off scanning with no edits. Simple. Then you only need to scan once and change edits in post.

Who cares about an article from 1999?

That would be someone able to learn not a fool who doesn't understand the topic yet has a strong opinion on it, and is not able to learn from experts in their fields:

“If you want to teach fools, I say don't waste your time! If you say I will learn something from fools then I say you are a fool!” ― Mehmet Murat ildan

And your expertise (degree, livelihood) was????

Mine: fully transparent.

Frankly, it's easier to do all editing in post-editing program rather than learning editing in a second and complicated scanning program like Silverfast or Epsonscan for that matter.

You've never used SliveFast sir. But you then comment about its use. Your difficulty learning is well established. Your first quote above sums it up well.

And you don't even know the name of the software you are using.

If you edit with the scanner program for the scan, and the scan results are not quite right, you have to waste time scanning again. Better off scanning with no edits. Simple. Then you only need to scan once and change edits in post.

Based on your photography and scanning, I fully understand you can't get good (right) results; the qualities if I can be so kind, speak for themselves.

If you ever decide to write an article on the subject, and someone decides to publish it without any peer review, you should title it: "Destructive workflows for simpletons"

You've got great examples for such an article.

Yes, olde wise one. Only you have Knowledge and Truth. Everyone else here are just dummies.

“No matter how smart you are, you can never convince someone stupid that they are stupid.”- Anonymous.

A true and comical take:

I have a Perfection V700. I have used it & Epson Scan for years to make scans from MF transparencies to use in Blurb books and online. For those applications it's fine, noting that the images in Blurb books tend to be 10" square or smaller. Epson can provide foc a software update for Win10 or Win 11. I loaded the latter today. Seems to be OK. Didn't ask about Mac but the point is that the scanner is still being supported after a fashion.

I should add also that I scan in the expectation of tinkering with colour, contrast etc in Photoshop rather than expecting to be able to produce a scan that's ready to use every time from the scanner. I might get better results from other scanning software but I won't spend $400 to find out as I'm happy with what I do for my limited applications. Back in the days when I needed to print bigger I had scans made on an Imacon or a drum scanner. I mention this purely because you don't say what your hopes or expectations from the V700 are.

Epson Scan (v6.4.1.00) runs on the latest version of OS X (12.2.1) on this end. I do use that for my Epson FastFoto.

One can also use Apple's Image Capture software instead. To use Image Capture, one first has to install Epson's ICA Scanner Driver for Image Capture.

Photoshop is indeed very useful after the scan stage, on high bit data, ideally in the scanner color space, after ideally as much global color and tone corrections for a master in that color space as can be provided. Selective edits, layers, cloning etc; the domain of tools like Photoshop.

Epson Scan (v6.4.1.00) runs on the latest version of OS X (12.2.1) on this end. I do use that for my Epson FastFoto.

One can also use Apple's Image Capture software instead. To use Image Capture, one first has to install Epson's ICA Scanner Driver for Image Capture.

Photoshop is indeed very useful after the scan stage, on high bit data, ideally in the scanner color space, after ideally as much global color and tone corrections for a master in that color space as can be provided. Selective edits, layers, cloning etc; the domain of tools like Photoshop.

You're now making my point. Why use Epsonscan or Silverfast to edit images when we have so many excellent post processing programs available? Scan flat, scan once. Edit scan results afterwards.

Thank you.

Why use Epsonscan or Silverfast to edit images when we have so many excellent post processing programs available?

You have this odd repetitive habit of asking questions of others, when your posting history and agenda show/prove, you have no desire or ability to accept any answer. No need to ask such questions. You were provided those answers which you dismissed before reading them; peer-reviewed articles you state are 'too old".

What's really too old is someone here who is unable to learn! But provides opinions based on a lot of misunderstandings of the technology and has very little experience in the subjects of which he has strong and often wrong opinions.

If anyone spends any time reading Alan's posts it becomes important to recognize Alan is someone who never lets nearly complete ignorance of a subject or the facts get in the way of having strong opinions about it. Peer review is a bitch.

This is seen on PhotoNet and far more often on Luminous Landscape.

You are the fellow who told us "all original prints are 300dpi" (utter rubbish):

Scanning resolution

You are the fellow who told us twice "the web is sRGB" (utter rubbish):

Calibration brightness level

And

Calibration brightness level

I'm only editing for the web which is sRGB.

You are the fellow who told us that you can calibrate photo's in Adobe products, (utter rubbish):

Calibration brightness level

"I've used Lightroom and PS Elements to calibrate the photos."

You have a lot of advise to offer, it is rather unfortunate that so often, it is completely wrong and without merit.

PLEASE STOP! Then I can refrain from showing your readers the errors of your understandings. Please.

Thank you.

"Deceiving a fool is an exploit worthy of an intelligent man".-Giacomo Girolamo Casanova

PLEASE STOP! Then I can refrain from showing your readers the errors of your understandings. Please.Thank you.

I think we are capable of filtering the opinions of others without you incessantly taking on the burden.

“We ourselves are the authors of almost all our woes and griefs, of which we so unreasonably complain.” -- Giacomo Casanova

I lost my Silverfast a few years back due to a computer upgrade. I decided to stick with the affordable but very capable Vuescan for my Nikon 9000 film scanner & Epson flatbed for prints and large negatives. The largest prints I make on my Epson P900 are 16x20 but the majority are smaller. At that size I don't see any advantage from Silverfast scans. Vuescan has been very good, tho I did prefer the Silverfast interface. I often still use Epson scan for the flatbed, on occasion for smaller final prints as David talks about. @pat_healy ... And as David says "I mention this purely because you don't say what your hopes or expectations from the V700 are."

I think we are capable of filtering the opinions of others without you incessantly taking on the burden.

Concerning my last (and last post to) Alan, I was addressing his question directly to me he doesn't again intend to listen to.

"An empty head is not really empty; it is stuffed with rubbish. Hence the difficulty of forcing anything into an empty head." -Eric Hoffer

With Alan, yeah, it's a burden, far more over on LuLa where he mostly posts his 'opinions' and others join in, in slamming down the nonsense. Best reply there to sum it up:

Bear Pit: now the sole domicile of politics at LuLa

Author=Peter McLennan

"Your recreational ignorance is showing again".

Enough said. On to aiding to OP with opinions based on scanning experience, based on facts. As you just posted.

"It's not the load that breaks you down, it's the way you carry it."

—Lou Holtz

You have this odd repetitive habit of asking questions of others, when your posting history and agenda show/prove, you have no desire or ability to accept any answer. No need to ask such questions. You were provided those answers which you dismissed before reading them; peer-reviewed articles you state are 'too old".

What's really too old is someone here who is unable to learn! But provides opinions based on a lot of misunderstandings of the technology and has very little experience in the subjects of which he has strong and often wrong opinions.

 

If anyone spends any time reading Alan's posts it becomes important to recognize Alan is someone who never lets nearly complete ignorance of a subject or the facts get in the way of having strong opinions about it. Peer review is a bitch.

 

This is seen on PhotoNet and far more often on Luminous Landscape.

You are the fellow who told us "all original prints are 300dpi" (utter rubbish):

Scanning resolution

 

You are the fellow who told us twice "the web is sRGB" (utter rubbish):

Calibration brightness level

And

Calibration brightness level

 

 

You are the fellow who told us that you can calibrate photo's in Adobe products, (utter rubbish):

Calibration brightness level

"I've used Lightroom and PS Elements to calibrate the photos."

 

You have a lot of advise to offer, it is rather unfortunate that so often, it is completely wrong and without merit.

PLEASE STOP! Then I can refrain from showing your readers the errors of your understandings. Please.

Thank you.

 

"Deceiving a fool is an exploit worthy of an intelligent man".-Giacomo Girolamo Casanova

You always resort to personal attacks and refuse to accept that others have their own experiences and opinions? Your insults and need to put others down who you disagree with just ruins the whole point of a photo forum. That's too bad.

Additionally, my question was not asked to elicit an answer. It was a rhetorical question that most people would interpret to mean that using Epsonscan or Silverfast to edit images is an added burden in this age when we have so many better imaging editing programs like Lightroom and Photoshop to use. Use scanning programs to scan only.

Certainly, you're entitled to your opinion on the matter. You're also entitled to disagree with my views. But you're not entitled to personally insult me and others, your regular practice when you disagree.

Additionally, my question was not asked to elicit an answer.

“A genius is someone who asks

dumb questions that nobody else

would ask, an idiot asks the smart

questions that have already been

answered" - Unknown

Right, and on this end (Mac), launch the software, select the "Service Dialog" button which will provide this info. It isn't found elsewhere in the main GUI.

http://digitaldog.net/files/ServiceDialog.jpg

Such a screen capture with a serial number is indeed proof of ownership if you need an installer (mine came on a USB stick).