Epson v500 vs. v600 for 6x7 film?

[francis_bartus]

<p>Hello everyone,</p>

<p>I have been working with a Mamiya RB67 for a couple of years now, almost exclusively shooting B&W and developing and printing it in a darkroom. I am incredibly pleased with the camera's capabilities but have been on a hiatus from the darkroom for some time now, which has led me to shoot some color negative and color positive film. I have been displeased with the long waits and poor results of commercial scanning (not talking drum scans here, of course) and I am looking for an affordable solution to scan my 6x7 films.</p>

<p>I am aware that flatbed scanners often struggle to reproduce shadow detail and can be limited in their ability to accurately reproduce color specifically in negative films. I am happy to invest time and effort into post-processing my scans in order to get the best possible results. I currently use Lightroom and PS CS4 in my workflow and am competent with both.</p>

<p>In terms of my expectations / goals for the scanner, I would be satisfied with high-quality 8 x 10" prints but would prefer the ability to print up to 11 x 14". In the future, I may have access (at a school) to a dedicated MF scanner such as a CS-9000, so I do not wish to over-invest at this point. My budget is about $100-300 for a decent solution, but of course, the less I spend on the scanner the more I can spend on film and processing.</p>

<p>That said, I have narrowed to field down to a few scanners - mostly the Epson v500 and v600 or the Canoscan 9000. I have a few questions about these scanners capabilities:</p>

<p><strong>*</strong> Am I correct in saying that the film holder for the Epson v500 only allows scanning one 6x7 negative at a time? What size filmstrip does the holder accept -- will I have to cut out individual frames or can it accept a 3-4 negative strip?</p>

<p><strong>*</strong> How advantageous are after-market film holders for the v500 or v600? Would it be better to, say, buy a v500 with an after-market holder than a v600 with the stock holder?</p>

<p><strong>*</strong> I have read that the v600 can scan up to 3 6x7 frames at a time. Does the output from these three frames produce one large image that can be cropped into three separate images, or does it make separate scans of each? How much time does this really save over scanning individual frames? I am more concerned with quality than quantity as I do not have many frames to scan.</p>

<p><strong>*</strong> The spacing between exposures on my negatives can be a bit inconsistent due to my film back -- will this preclude me from scanning multiple frames at once with the v600 holder?</p>

<p><strong>*</strong> I have read that the bundled software with all of the aforementioned flatbeds is lacking. That said, would it be a better value to buy a cheaper scanner (i.e. v500) with Silverfast or Vuescan rather than the more expensive scanner (i.e. v600) without?</p>

<p>Sorry for the long-winded post, and thanks for your time and attention on this matter. A disclaimer: I am, of course, aware that an Epson v700/v750, Nikon CS9000, or Hasselblad Flextight X5, would create better output than any of the abovementioned configurations. I am simply looking for the best bang for the buck without breaking the bank.</p>

<p>Happy shooting,<br>

Francis</p>

[francis_bartus]

<p>One more thing - I have noticed that my Minolta Dimage Scan Dual IV seems to prefer Astia / Provia 100F above all other films and just has a better time with slides in general. Are there any particular color films that the above-mentioned scanners are more friendly with than others? I have heard that in terms of shadow detail, these flatbeds struggle a bit more with slides, but in terms of color reproduction, slides are superior. Is this true?</p>

<p>Thanks,<br>

Francis</p>

[stwrtertbsratbs5]

<p>You may want to look at the CF Systems ColorPerfect Photoshop plug-in for scanning and color correcting negatives. I use it for all inverts and color corrections of negative materials. Info is here:</p>

<p>http://www.colorneg.com/warumcolorneg_sw.html?lang=en<br>

http://www.colorneg.com/oldneg.html?lang=en</p>

<p>As for scanners - consumer flatbeds will struggle with dense slides, so it's nice that you may have access to a Nikon scanner.</p>

[mattb1]

<p>IMO skip the Epsons for MF, too many issues and too much work for a less than desirable result. Find another lab if you can, more than likely most labs will produce better images than you can get with an Epson. And neither will come close to wet printing for MF. The Nikon is about the best you can get for a desk top IMO. But, I understand that it is expensive. I'd suggest using the one at your school as much as possible.</p>

<p>I had a Epson for a few years and do not have a single MF scan to show for it. I have a few 35mm scans that are OK. But really glad I moved on to a real scanner. </p>

<p>Spend the money on film and take more photos.</p>

[StuartMoxham]

<p>Here are what my MF scans look like from the V500</p><div></div>

[StuartMoxham]

<p>Top one is 645 the other two are 6x7</p>

[francis_bartus]

<p>Robert - thanks for the link, I will definitely look into trying that plugin, if not for an Epson than for my existing Scan Dual IV</p>

<p>Matt - thanks for the advice. Unfortunately, I will not have free access to a dedicated film scanner for quite some time, next summer at the earliest. So I am looking for a solution in the meantime. Most labs charge quite a pretty penny for MF scans so I am looking at it in a cost/benefit sort of way. This work is for my own personal enjoyment rather than any exacting fine-art or commercial application, so the "fun" of being able to scan all of my negs and slides rather than picking and choosing, not to mention the convenience of being able to display my work on the web at no marginal cost outweighs the drawbacks of a flatbed scanner.</p>

<p>Stuart - thanks for your images - I ran across these on PN while researching scanners and they definitely pointed me toward the v500. You really can't beat it for the price. Do you use the included software to make these scans or some third-party option?</p>

<p>Cheers,<br>

Francis</p>

[StuartMoxham]

<p>I just use epson scan with the standard holders. I am not really interested in buying more software or third party film holders as they add to the cost of the scanner. As the V500 stands it is a good budget option to shoot film and get some resonable scans for very little cost. At the end of the day the V500 is what it is. It is not a Nikon coolscan or even a V700 which has better optics. I just use the V500 and accept what it will and won't do. That way it is simple, for the print sizes I make from 6x4 to 8x10 the V500 does just fine. I would not worry about making the odd 12x18 inch prints of the medium format scans from the V500 but I don't usually print so big. When I make B&W darkroom prints I usually make 7x7 or 8x8 inch prints from medium format. After spending around five years working as a wide format printer using 42 inch and 50 inch wide printers I just don't have any desire to make large prints at home. I like my prints in albums so I don't print that large.</p>

[peterbcarter]

<p>I have the one before the v500 (4490) and made a wet mount for my scanning needs. <a href="http://myfilmstuff.blogspot.com/2010/04/5-wet-mount.html">http://myfilmstuff.blogspot.com/2010/04/5-wet-mount.html</a> I have the ANR glass for 35mm and the better scanning tray/anr and I can't say it did me any good. I'm not sure why there are not any wet mount kits available for this series, as there are enough of them out there.</p>

<p>I scan @ 2400 and have no real issues with MF.</p>

<p><img src="http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4134/4786555624_b3a44beae8_z_d.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>Something in infra red & SFX on MF.</p>

[will_jefferson]

<p>Peter, I checked out your blog post about the wet mount. That is great and I want to build one for my V600<br>

I am wondering if its better to use ANR glass with your design?</p>

[peterbcarter]

<p>Thanks, and ANR glass is not what you want.</p>

<p>ANR glass scatters the light with surface scratches. This is useful behind the scanned surface to eliminate the rings. On the scanned surface it would effectively scatter you image, reducing the detail in the image. This is why we use the fluid and plain glass here.</p>

[will_jefferson]

<p>I see. Yeah I looked into the norton ring phenomena a little, but still a little confused about what exactly is causing it. So far I am using the stock carrier in my V600 and scanning mostly ektar 100 roll film, and have been getting the occasional ring with that set up...<br>

Anyway the gains from wet mounting even with the level of scanner that I have seem to be worth while, so I want to give it a go.<br>

Thanks for your input!</p>