Flatbed scanners with a full size transparency unit

[paul a. roid]

hello all,<br>

I'm looking for a (cheap) flatbed scanner with a full size <br>

(8.5" x 11") transparency unit.<p>

The only purpose of this scanner would be to scan contact sheets<br>

from my negatives.<p>

It needs to work with a Mac (OS 10.3) and USB or Firewire.

[jeffrey moore]

I don't know what your definition of cheap is, but you're not going to find a lot of options in flatbeds that scan 8.5 x 11 transparencies. This one fits the bill: Epson Perfection 4870; $380, after $50 mfg. rebate, at B&H.

[mike_r4]

The Epson 4870 will scan transparencies up to 6"x9". Microtek makes some flatbeds that will do 8x10, I'm not sure about 8.5x11. Markus, I'm not sure I understand what you want to do. You say you want to scan contact sheets, but you need a 8.5x11 transparency unit. To me, a contact sheet is a paper print. You don't need a transparency unit to scan prints. What size are your negs?

[paul a. roid]

hello Mike,<br>

I want to produce digital contact sheets from my negatives<br>

for viewing on screen and for inkjet prints. Kinda digital within <br>

a traditional workflow. I want to scan a whole roll of film (six strips<br>

of negatives in archival sleeves) in one pass in a decent quality.<p>M

[custom film holders for fl]

Markus - given your latest post, I am not sure you are going to be able to accomplish what you want via the method you plan. Flatbeds are marginal for decent quality 35 mm as it is, but if you aren't going to put the strips in something that can keep the film totally flat, you are going to degrade the results. More importantly, you are really going to degrade things by leaving them in plastic sleeves. If you were just going to make quick contact sheets for cataloging and indexing purposes, that would be one thing but I got the impression you were planning to make prints from this of "decent" quality. FWIW, the Canon 9950 and Epson 4990 (both new models) have larger light lids. The Microtek i900 may, too.

<p> Doug<p>

<a href="http://home.earthlink.net/~dougfisher/holder/mainintro.html">Dougs

MF Film Holder for batch scanning of 120/220 medium format film with flatbeds</a>

[jack paradise]

You want cheap ?

 

This is what you need.

 

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/digital-contacts.shtml

[tedharris]

Markus,

 

Cheal cheap solutionis to find a used UMAX PowerLook III. It willgive you ok quality but

nothing to write home about. I recently sold mine for $50 w a SCSI cable.

 

If you want to go up to the 600 range then you can get a Microtek i900 which will do

everything you need. However, scanning the 35mm negs inside the sleeve will, of course,

lower the resolution and render them less than fit for further use to print say 8x10.

[paul a. roid]

yepp, I was looking at a UMAX 1100 -<br>

I'm not too concerned about the quality...<p>

right now I'm doing the same thing with an<br>

Epson 2400 and 3170, but I can do only one <br>

strip at a time. I have about 100 rolls from 2004<br>

to catch up with.<p>Reflective is not an option,<br>

since the scans turn out dingy as hell...

[ravishankar_ramanathan]

Markus, if you are looking to print multiple images in a single sheet (as opposed to printing the film strip with the edges and all), then you can use iPhoto (since you mentioned Mac!) to do this for you. Here is a link that will tell you how to do this:

 

http://www.mactipsandtricks.com/tips/display.lasso?mactip=83

 

Or you can google it (look for iPhoto contact sheets). With this method, you scan individual images and once they are imported into iPhoto, select a bunch and print a contact sheet.

 

Hope this helps!

[tom_schneider]

You can try the digital camera copy technique. Shoot a copy of the negs, on a lightbox using camera raw file, then invert and adjust. I've tried it with a Nikon D1x, and the results were admittedly underwhelming (soft, even when captured at an output resolution of 300dpi), but definitely fast for capture. I also have an Epson 4870 which does a better job, but you have to scan in two sections and it is time consuming - which is why I bothered to try the copy camera route in the first place.

[don_douglas]

I have an Epson 3200 which has a film strip holder which accommodates two six-frame strips. It is limited by the width of the overhead transparency light, 4-5/8" or 12cm. In the distant past I used a flatbed, forget the brand, which had a transparency adapter in the form of a light bar the full width of the scanner which rolled along the length of it to make the scan. The scan quality was not good, but sufficient for a contact sheet. I don't know if any such scanner is still made, but one might be found used.