Advice on choosing a scanner

[christopher_moss]

Some advice please on picking out a 35mm scanner. Just lately I have been experimenting

with scanning some old negatives and slides with a cheapo Pacific Image scanner. While it

has allowed me to have digital versions of some nostalgic photos, they are plainly not up

to snuff for printing at 10x8. Despite this I have had such fun doing it that I have started

using some T-Max 100 in my old cameras again. As things stand I can't get good prints

from these, and my enlarger is so full of dust from long years of neglect....

So I'm thinking about getting a decent scanner. I'm no pro, and do not need the ultimate

scanner, but a hobbyist with high standards. It looks as if either the KM DiMage Dualscan

IV or the Nikon Coolscan V (have roman numerals come back into fashion?) I live in the

middle of nowhere in Nova Scotia, so seeing these things in a dealer's shop is a joke. I'm

going to have to buy it sight unseen.

Does anyone have any thoughts on these or other options? I would really like it if someone

could mail me a full-size scan of a sharp negative (I know, you guys don't have any of the

unsharp sort, and I do have a DSL connection) so I can see for myself how good a job they

can do! Thanks very much!

Chris

[terry_rory]

I am also interested in seeing any opinions on the Minolta Dimage Scan Dual IV.

[djl251]

I have the Coolscan V and it's all I need. What kind of film are you interested in seeing? I

could send you some scans.

[steve_west]

I was in the same position as you unitl a couple of days ago when I bought a Dimage

5400. I'm on a slow connection so attaching files here. The first image is almost the full

scan and the second is a crop at 100% (input 5400dpi, output 300dpi). Shot on Leica

M7 35mm lens with colour positive film. I've messed with the image in terms of

converting it to B&W and sharpening.<div></div>

[steve_west]

and the crop...<div></div>

[working camera]

You can't really go past the Nikon scanners IMO. The Nikon software, I believe is

totally underrated, is also excellent and allows unbelievable control over image

scanning. In particular the "Analogue Gain" feature. It leaves Silverfast for dead, which

I use on my Epson flatbed.

 

I've found (the hard way) the only way to see if a scanner suits your working style and

needs is to use it for a while. I don't know if you can hire such equipment but it would

be great if it were possible.

 

good luck C.

[ronald_moravec1]

Minolta 5400 works just great. I use the original software. I have scanned all kind of B&W developed for a condenser enlarger. Revisit later and I will put up a test target with a complete range of tones and fine detail. Right now the fall colors are out and the bag is packed. Been overcast for several days in Chicago. Now is the time.

[lazarus]

I have a DiMage Dualscan IV for a year now. For me it was the most scanner that i could buy for the money($300us) and i am quit happy with it.

Pros:3200 dpi/Multi-sample scanning 2x, 4x, 8x, 16x, OFF

Con: The liklyhood of you have to up grade your computer USB, ram and hard drive. While scanning you can do nothing with your puter other then scan.<div></div>

[terry_rory]

Steve, my RAM is marginal (only 512 meg) and I only have 112 Gig left over on my hard-drive. I do have USB 2.0 though. Will the Scan Dual IV cause problems for me? (Should I get 2 gig RAM and an additional hard drive?)

 

I will not be storing scanned images permanently on the hard-drive (they will be backed off on to best quality TDK CD-Rs)

[christopher_moss]

Donald: I'm only interested in B&W, thanks for your help here!

Everyone else: looks like both the DiMage and the Coolscan have their fans. Has anyone

used both or seen output from both to compare quality? The Nikon is more expensive, so I

would want it to justify the extra cost...

PS Hard to post when inverting the developer tank every few seconds!

Chris

[stuart_richardson]

Trevor -- you will not have any problems with that configuration. I used a Scan Dual III

regularly on my laptop, which had far less hard drive space, no USB 2.0 and the same

RAM. It worked fine. I think the Minolta is a great scanner. I upgraded to the Scan Multi Pro

because I was interested in using a scanner for medium format. At 4800 dpi, I have

printed good prints at 13 by 19 inches from 35mm.

[stuart_richardson]

I should say you will not have any problems scanning. The slowest parts come in when you

are dealing with 80mg files in photoshop. If you do not have a fast video card, processor,

lots of RAM and hard drive space it can take a long time. The solution is to scan large,

edit, and then image size it down to 800x600 or whatever size you choose. If you choose

"Save for Web" it will take ages.

[scott_fleming1]

I think about getting a scanner. To my mind real digital photography begins at the 1Ds.

Of course that's because I only shoot landscape and print at least 16 x 20. When

comparing prices given an Imacon 343 at $5k ... a 1ds Mk II at $8k (and of course more

lenses) ... a used Kodak back $7k ... and we won't evn go to the insanity of a new 22MP

medium format back ... the Imacon doesn't look so bad.

 

I like shooting chromes and I like the lenses I have. If one spends $5k now and waited 3

years fo prices to get real ... IF they ever do ... it would be a good investment. Scanning

really is the only thing putting pressure on the camera and back manufacturers to get

their prices down.

 

But I haven't decided to buy a scanner yet. I can get an awful lot of professional scans

done for $5000 and considering I'm more than happy with 20 keepers in a year (I should

be so good)... my scanning costs are only about double the interst I could earn on $5k

per year.

[paul a. roid]

I'm using a KM Scan Dual IV and don't use the original software

with b/w anymore. The tonality looked akward to me and higlights

were easily blown. The negs are good. The Minolta software is

good for color negs and slides. It picks up every speck of dust tho'.

The dust removal software is a joke...

 

Some people recommend the Nikon V over the Minolta IV because

it has the famous ICE dust removal technology.

 

I haven't seen it in person - but it sure sounds good. If you don't

mind the clone stamping in Photoshop, go for the Dual IV, you can't

beat the scanning quality for the price (less than $300).

 

Btw. I'm using the Vuescan software with the Minolta and it works

beautiful. See a b/w scan comparison in my weblog (urbansnitch.com/blog)

[huw_finney]

There is a new one by Plustek, a real 7200dpi for 160UKP! Amateur Photograper gave it a good review.

 

http://www.plustek.com/products/film.htm

[christopher_moss]

Ah, but Huw, it doesn't support Mac OS X, which is a must for me!

 

Chris

[huw_finney]

Just wait until the Linux guys write a driver, OS X is free BSD underneath, I am shure the Linux driver could be hacked.

[nikos peri]

Dust off the enlarger?

[ronald_moravec1]

I am going to put up a 75% neg scan and then a detail of the lace at the bottom of the skirt. Minolta 5400. This is my standard test target. Grey board, grey scale, and doll with black satin skirt and white linen blouse. Illumination is electronic flash in 45 deg left and right pattern. If these print correctly, any normal contrast scene will print or scan.<div></div>

[ronald_moravec1]

Now here is the detail of the lace at the bottom of the skirt<div></div>

[ronald_moravec1]

Jpeg compression killed it. Before I saved it as jpeg, every detail I could see with 8x loupe was on the screen perfectly.

[ronald_moravec1]

one more try for the detail<div></div>

[stuart_richardson]

My lord, are you allowed to post upskirt shots on photo.net????<P>Kidding. But Markus, as

for the Minolta with black and white, did you try to scan it as a positive and then invert it

in photoshop? I find that I get much better scans if I do it that way. I am not sure why, but

it is always better. I just index as bw negative, prescan as a bw positive, adjust the

histogram so that the dynamic range is just more than the tones present in the image,

scan, invert in photoshop and adjust the levels to my liking. It is a bit fidgety, but the

results are excellent.

[christopher_moss]

Ron, impressive detail. Much better than my current scanner can turn out. Thanks!

 

Chris

[jorge]

>> Some people recommend the Nikon V over the Minolta IV because it has the famous ICE dust removal technology. <<

 

The Minolta 5400 has ICE, but that only works with color or chromogenic B&W films. I've had my 5400 for 13 months now and find it a superb scanner that can resolve the grain off ISO400 film. It's fairly fast and the noise/signal ratio is very low. I've never found the need for multiple pass scans but this model can do 16 pass scans if necessary.

 

The best way I've found for scanning silver B&W negatives is to scan as a color slide in 16 bit per channel "linear" mode (the equivalent of RAW) or if using SilverFast Ai, which I have also, with the HDR option. Either one dumps a RAW scan of very high dynamic range into Photoshop where it gets easily inverted and adjusted with all shadow and highlight detail intact.

 

My original 5400 failed on its 40th day of use and then the official Minolta service in my country (Mexico) not only was unable to fis it but broke it and slyly attempted to return it to me in that condition. I had to threathen to sue them to get them to send it to the USA where it was replaced with a new -or maybe refurbished- unit. This maneuver cost me over $300 in import duties that I had previously avoided by bringing the scanner with me from the US under a tax franchise for computer peripherals. I'm still pissed off at the lousy service but the scanner is totally commendable.