mjferron Posted December 4, 2010 Share Posted December 4, 2010 <p>Much better. I actually resused yesterdays chems and added 4% to the recommended times. This time the temp was 105F (It's on the paperwork) and agitated 30 sec per minute. Film was an older roll of Kodak E100GX I had in the fridge. Shot with a Nikon F100 and 35mm 2.8 D. All scans on from an Epson V700</p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjferron Posted December 4, 2010 Author Share Posted December 4, 2010 <p>Look real yellows</p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjferron Posted December 4, 2010 Author Share Posted December 4, 2010 <p>Proper metering</p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjferron Posted December 4, 2010 Author Share Posted December 4, 2010 <p>And btw the V700 cannot scan 35mm film at all. Check out the poor detail in a 100% crop.</p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
art_thomas1 Posted December 4, 2010 Share Posted December 4, 2010 <p>How many PPI did you scan "bad detail" at? </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjferron Posted December 4, 2010 Author Share Posted December 4, 2010 <p>3200</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thirteenthumbs Posted December 4, 2010 Share Posted December 4, 2010 <p>Did you shoot hand held, with a mono pod, or a tripod? What shutter speed?</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_falth Posted December 4, 2010 Share Posted December 4, 2010 <p>Michael,<br> For what it's worth, in a three-day scanning workshop that I attended a few years ago, we used the V700 and the older epson 4990.</p> <p>It was the general consensus of the workshop presenter’s that it did not pay to try and do scans on any film format, greater than about 2000-2200 on the v700 and the older epson, even by experienced operators. </p> <p>Even though, the v700 was considerably newer, the older, and cheaper epson 4990 performed imperceptibly as well as its newer sibling in the hands of experienced operators.</p> <p>BTW, tripod use and mirror lockup is considered a given, if you're going to scan with any need for sharpness.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StuartMoxham Posted December 4, 2010 Share Posted December 4, 2010 <p>No you never scanned those with a flatbed your just tricking us. :)<br> Glad you got your E6 processing sorted out.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_shriver Posted December 4, 2010 Share Posted December 4, 2010 <p>You've nailed it this time -- that's the look of E100GX that I'm familiar with.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LenMarriott Posted December 4, 2010 Share Posted December 4, 2010 <p>Michael, I'd like to see the shot 'Bad Scan' scanned with a higher end 35mm film scanner & posted here so we can compare the V700 quality against 'whatever else' gives you the results you feel you can live with. Actually, I don't think your 'Bad Scan' is all that bad. Depends, I guess, on your expectations and final print requirements. Best, LM.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LenMarriott Posted December 4, 2010 Share Posted December 4, 2010 <p>Michael, I'll try to demonstrate the difference between a Minolta Scan Dual ll and an Epson V500 using a Velvia 35mm slide. Hope this helps. Best, LM.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LenMarriott Posted December 4, 2010 Share Posted December 4, 2010 <p>Well that didn't go well. Let me try again. LM</p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LenMarriott Posted December 4, 2010 Share Posted December 4, 2010 <p>Let's try a V500 crop. LM</p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LenMarriott Posted December 4, 2010 Share Posted December 4, 2010 <p>And now a Scan Dual ll crop. LM</p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LenMarriott Posted December 4, 2010 Share Posted December 4, 2010 <p>Michael, I think the V500 sample was scanned at 2400 ppi and the Scan Dual sample at 2820 ppi. Perhaps not a perfect comparison but I think close enough for a judgment on the quality available from these two scanners. Hope this cast some light on rather than confusing the issue. Also, perhaps someone (that would be most anyone) with more skills than I could get better results. Best, LM.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDMvW Posted December 5, 2010 Share Posted December 5, 2010 <p>In any case, very nice looking results.</p> <p>Back when I actually had a good working darkroom I toyed with E-6, but I don't remember my results looking so clean.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StuartMoxham Posted December 5, 2010 Share Posted December 5, 2010 <p>I don't think Michael really meant the the V700 scan was bad.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjferron Posted December 5, 2010 Author Share Posted December 5, 2010 <p>Exactly Stuart. It's not an Imacon but better than a lot give it credit for. Takes a bit to get the best out of it.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjferron Posted December 5, 2010 Author Share Posted December 5, 2010 <p>J. Falth. I'm not sure what the acual max resolution of the Epsons are but the known photographer, writer and master color printer ctien says it's best to scan at high resolutions. If you downsize for say an 8x10 it will keep noise and grain to a minimum. On B&W film I jack it all the way up to 4800 and things look good to my eyes.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mauro_franic Posted December 5, 2010 Share Posted December 5, 2010 <p>Congrats on the processing.</p> <p>Regarding the scan if you downsize it 2000 dpi, which is closer to its real resolution, it doesn't look bad, but it still exhibits a little noise introduced by the scanner.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mauro_franic Posted December 5, 2010 Share Posted December 5, 2010 <p>This is a test I performed a few years back. You are right for 35mm a flatbed will not give you print quality for more than 8x10 but as long as your expectations are in line you can get decent results.</p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mauro_franic Posted December 5, 2010 Share Posted December 5, 2010 <p>Also the V700 produces better scans than the V500.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjferron Posted December 5, 2010 Author Share Posted December 5, 2010 <p>Thanks Mauro. The v700 needs all the help it can get for decent scans. I've found that flat film on the horizontal is a must. Emlusion side up and for my machine film holder adjusters on the low setting.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StuartMoxham Posted December 5, 2010 Share Posted December 5, 2010 <p>If you give the v500 image a bit of sharpening it will crispen up quite nicely too.</p><div></div> 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