OT Buying my first neg scanner and printer soon.

[terry_rory]

I will soon be getting a new (Dell) PC but will NOT be going digital

as far as my cameras are concerned. Instead I will invest a good

amount of money into a quality neg scanner and printer.

 

I have just read impressive reviews in 'Amateur Photographer' of

these...

 

Printer... Epson Stylus Photo R800

 

Scanner... Nikon Coolscan V ED

 

However they are both new models and are therefore full price items.

(Here in the UK, full price means £350 UK for the printer and £550 UK

for the scanner!)

 

A total of £900 is a bit obscene and would get me a good user

Hasselblad V system or a good user Leica M body and lens.

 

Sooo.. can you good folks recommend (from personal experience) a nice

quality, available new in UK shops, scanner/printer combination that

would give excellent photo quality A4 prints and at least 2820 bpi

(for the neg scanner)? Thanks.

 

I currently post images from CDs created on a Fuji frontier system

(at time of development) so I will have quite a learning curve to go

through with this new kit therefore ease of use will be important to

me.

 

I know there are other forums to ask this on but I would'nt trust

them to recommend a good toothbrush let alone up to £900 worth of

peripherals!

 

Thanks and happy new year to all.

[bds1]

Trevor

 

Do you just use 35mm? if so that sounds OK to me. Minolta have a newish scanner

out at the moment that might be worth looking at. If you want to scan larger negs the

price hikes right up

[johann_fuller]

I wouldn't call this stuff peripheral and £900 is peanuts to get good output (if it does that). Also budget for software, a screen calibrator, and plenty of ink and paper. Maybe better to just get a scanner at first and send files to a frontier lab for output - there is plenty to learn -also you may be better asking this on the digital darkroom BB.

[al_kaplan1]

Yesterday I received my Epson Perfection 1670 scanner, got it hooked up, and yes, it scans! I have quite a bit of learning to go even though my ambition is mostly to post pictures on the internet, not to make photo quality prints here.

[jim_mcbride]

Trevor: I will be watching the responses to your question with great interest because I

am in a similar position, although I already have taken the plunge as far as a printer is

concerned: I invested in a Canon i960 and (so far) am reasonably happy with it,

although I'm not real happy with the price of the consumables. The scanner I intend to

buy will have to be very versatile and I have settled on the yet-to-be released Epson

Perfection 4870. Yes, I know it's a flatbed, but it's supposed to do a good job with film

up to 4x5, too. Since I use everything from 35mm to 4x5 I really need to have those

options. The reported price range of $600 - $700 is within my budget and, well, I'm

relying to a certain extent on the Epson reputation. Like many people out there, I want

to partcipate in the digital revolution, but I have a huge investment in analog cameras

and lenses. Going the scanner route (at least temporarily) is an economical

compromise. Hope I make a good guess.

[will_perlis]

Trevor,

 

Don't forget to factor in the *real* speed of a scanner+printer & your own personality into your buying equation.

 

Lately I've been sitting down with intentions of cleaning the Augean backlog and then almost immediately deciding that a) If my kids want to see the pictures they can do so after I'm dead, and b) I'd rather watch corn grow to the height of an elephant's eye on someone's web-cam than start a scan for a words/no words thread.

[patricks]

Trevor,

 

I've been waiting for the R800 as well, however, you might want to consider buying one from the States. List price here will be $399, which makes it pretty attractive considering the weak US dollar.

[p._neil_ralley]

Trevor, a couple of suggestions: (1) separate these two items in your thinking. A viable option would be to get the scanner now but postpone the printer purchase and continue to get whatever prints you want done by a lab. Here in the US (and I suspect that the UK is no different) the economics of home-printing vs lab printing are not compelling when the costs of printer, ink, software and paper are all factored in. The decision concerning the scanner will depend on what you are paying for the CDs from the Frontier and whether they are of a high enough resolution for your needs. (2) If you do buy either item check out the availability and cost of buying 'refurbished' direct from Epson. Refurbished items are usually "as new" in all but outer packaging and come fully guaranteed. My refurbished 1160 printer is into its 4th year and is still going strong. FWIW my own workflow is that I shoot 35mm slides, I get them professionally scanned (approx 18mb files) and whatever prints I need are produced on an Agfa D-Lab which is very similar to the Frontier. I do own an Epson 1640 scanner and the 1160 printer but both are used infrequently for anything photography-related. Just my 2C......Neil, <a href="http://www.stainedglassphotography.com">Stained Glass Photography</a>

[beau 1664876222]

Trevor,

 

As for scanners, the new Nikons are aggressively priced and should dominate the market for some time. For a budget-minded 35mm shooter I think the Coolscan V is a no-brainer - I don't think it has serious competition right now. Alternatively, you can probably find a good used (or leftover new) Coolscan IV for 3 Benjamins or so, and that's a great scanner (my whole folder was done with it).

[akochanowski]

Trevor, what you should get depends what you plan to do with your scans. An Epson flatbed is a very good buy if what you want is to post on the Web and make smallish prints from the digital file. I t may not have the same dynamic range as a dedicated Nikon or Canon or Minolta, but the scans are plenty good, if my older Epson 1640 is any example. But if you want to scan 35mm transparency film with a full color range at a resolution that would enable you to print at 16x20 inch sizes, you will need a 4000dpi or higher dedicated scanner. Yes, you can interpolate up from a smaller file in PS if you scan at 3000dpi or so, but you will begin to be able to see some artifacts. I personally use a CanoScan4000 which is now reduced in price-- I saw it at B&H for about $550. The Minolta with 5400 dpi is supposed to be terrific, but I haven't used it.

 

The second issue is your scanning software. All scanners will come with a software package, but from what I have seen they are all essentially PS plugins, which means that tyou will be scanning through PS. That takes up computer resources, namely slows things down. The Epson software that I've used is well laid out but limited. So is the Canon FilmGet. Many people who like you produce film and do digital on the back end use a dedicated software package called Vuescan. It costs about $40-$80 depending on what features you get, but is a full piece of software that is customizable and, importantly, independent of PS. Highly recommended.

 

Next, the issue of dusting software. Vuescan has dust removal. Canon has the same feature called FARE, and Nikonj has licensed ICE. All of these will take color negative film and slide film (except Kodachrome) and automatically remove specks and dust. I can tell you that Canon's software is great, as is the Vuescan version. My Epson doesn't have it, maybe newer ones do. The software will not work on black and white films except C41 process films. So, if you plan on scanning only TriX, that shouldn't matter much to you. Once you've spent two hours with a clone tool dusting a scan, though, you'll begin to appreciate the beauty of using film that can get automatically cleaned up.

 

If you gop for a 4000dpi scanner of any brand load up on RAM. 512 is good, 1G is better. Look for USB 2.0 or Firewire connectivity, it will speed things up quite a bit.

 

Printers: I have used an Epson 1280 for two years without a problem. As others have said, consumables are expensive. The bigger issue inmy mind though is whether you intend to use the printer for black and white or color. There is no doubt that for color the Epson will produce fantastic results. On Epson's Photo Glossy paper I get prints that beat the daylights out of minilab prints, and look as good to me as traditional Ilfachromes. The learning curve is a bit steep, but after some false starts you will get great looking color prints. For B&W it's a different story. You will get a different look than silver, maybe one that appeals to you, but it will not be the same. If you are buying a printer with the expectation that you will crank out B&W prints that look like darkroom prints you will be disappointed. That's it for now, hope this helps.

[EricM]

I�m another vote for leaving the printer aside at the moment. Another thing that should be mentioned is that printers need to be used or the rollers gum up. So, if you just want a printer to do the odd out put, then I recommend not getting one.

 

Scanners. Another thing to consider is final file size when shopping for scanners. Two manufactures can claim a 4000dpi scan, but with the same E 6 slide, these two scanners produce different size files. Larger the better, more information, obviously. I�ve been using the Epson 3200 Pro with the included Silverfast software, it�s an awesome scanner for the price, and puts most film only scanners to shame. It takes all formats up to 5x7, and a 35mm slide gives me a 48 to 51 meg file, which is huge and unnecessary most of the time. With our current limits in 8/12/16 bit software, there is no point going over 3600dpi scanning, IMO.

[m_.]

just to throw in more mess: don't forget the photo editing software like Photoshop. It's another $650 or so. Never used the mentioned printer but Nikon film scanner should be more than adequate for scanning 35mm for both internet use or prints up to a certain size.

[dale_schreiner]

I'm also in the same situation as Trevor. I'd like to primarily output black-and-white prints scanned from Ilford XP2 negatives so I've pretty well decided on the Minolta 5400 film scanner and the HP 7960 printer. Although doesn't print A3/11x17, its mono output seems to be the best of the inkjets right out of the box and it's reasonably priced so I figure it's a good learning tool at the very least.

[tony_brookes]

Trevor.

 

I'm also in the UK and I have just bought both a new scanner and a new printer. I want top class results from digital scanning of negs and prints and documents so I bought a Canon 9900F and a Canon i850 printer. These two items were recommended to me by someone who has the very best equipment for professional purposes and said these were the best at the moment for the sort of money I had (up to £400 for each. In fact they cost me £250 each) Having had a Polaroid 4000 scanner and use of an Epson 2100 printer I can honestly say that up to A3 I cannot tell any difference.

[ben peeples]

Trevor,

I have been scanning negs and printing inkjet from for 18 months. I have the minolta 5400. Love it. Good output, good workflow, slides and negs. Buddy has the nikon that does 2900dpi. Not really possible to tell a difference. I have been print B&W on the epson2200. Very happy with it also. I like the larger papersize options. Presently print 8X12 on 11x14 paper. No problem with gumming. I turn it off if I am not going to print for more that 4 days running. Prior I had an epson 820 and a hp photosmart scanner. I would buy my present equipment again in a heartbeat. Ben. ps. To get good B&W it takes some work with the printer profiles. B.

[wgpinc]

Trevor,

I highly recommend the new Minolta Dimage III scanner. I bought the Minolta 5400 which is higher priced and resolution but my brother has been using the D III and getting great results. BH in New York is selling it for $279 which is the best bargain around. It is one of the few film scanners new enough in the product cycle to be USB 2.0. I am using an Epson 820 printer but if I did it again I might buy the Canon 9100 or the HP 7960, or else one of the higher priced Epsons. Regards, Gil.

[johann_fuller]

"I�ve been using the Epson 3200 Pro with the included Silverfast software, it�s an awesome scanner for the price, and puts most film only scanners to shame" - this is totaly untrue - I own a 3200 and an LS4000 - there is a huge difference between the 2 - in favour of the Nikon.

[majid]

You don't need to buy Photoshop, Elements 2.0 will be included in almost any modern scanner. You will lose 16-bit ability, which means you will have to apply tone curves in the scanner driver, but that's not a big hurdle.

 

Unless you are shooting B&W primarily, I would get the Coolscan V. Nikon's scanners are better than the competition at important things like low image noise levels (highlight and shadow detail) rather than meaningless specmanship like inflated resolution figures and bogus Dmax ratings.

 

If you are shooting B&W, Digital ICE will not work, and a cheaper scanner like the Minolta Dual III might be more cost-effective. You would do better to get an HP printer like the 7660 or 7960, they offer truly neutral B&W using the tri-gray No. 59 cartridge, unlike other printer brands.

[majid]

Oh, and Minolta just announced the Dimage Scan Dual IV today, so you can look for closeouts on the III.

[xavier_dalfort]

Hi Trevor.

 

I had a very good deal on a second hand Nikon LS2000 (400 Euros) and for printing, I use the FujiNet service (delivered at the street corner photog shop). When the print is not good, I ask for another one (free, of course!).

 

The Old Nikon is rather good, come with a nikonscan Software including ICE.

 

The other day, I had 100prints for 25 Euros, a good deal.

 

The ink and paper is rather expensive. Better is to transfer a file to a online printing service and have it delivered to the door.

 

Don't buy the top notch, it's waste, even more than buying a Leica (Flame suit on...).

 

FWIW.<div></div>

[thomas_sullivan]

when i first got into this film to digital, i bought the film scanner and printer at the same time.....would not do it again. You will not believe the learning curve on just using a film scanner and photoshop (and yes, get the full photoshop...not Elements or whatever else adobe or your scanner manufacturer offers). By the time you get scanning and editing down CORRECTLY, they will probably have a new printer available.........i am serious about that.....use Adorama or something like that to get prints for now.

 

Stay with the Nikon choice for the scanner......for one thing, they have a feature called "analog gain"...and although they advertise it mainly for shadow detail in slides............it does some amazing things with highlite detail in B&W negatives.

 

As far as "clean image systems" (ICE) go...........forget them. For me, anyhow, they soften the image too much with the way they hide the dust and scratches. Find a color lab that provides you with dust and scratch free negs, and perfect your B&W home developing techniques to do the same. The amount of "spotting" you will have to do will then be minimal.........and your scans will be "tack" sharp.

 

have fun..........its great stuff!

[godfrey]

<center>

<img src="http://www.bayarea.net/~ramarren/photostuff/mnx20001/large/

Yoke.JPG"><br>

<i>Historic Site in North Carolina - Minox EC and APX25 film</i><br>

</center><br>

 

 

I've done all my 35mm and smaller format negative scanning with a Minolta Dimage

Scan Dual II (current III model available for $275 or so from B&H Photo). I drive it with

VueScan (<a href="http://www.hamrick.com/">http://www.hamrick.com</a> ...

about $80 for the pro version) and do all my image editing with Photoshop (now CS or

version 8). I print with an Epson 1270 (yeah, behind the times ... the 1280 or 1290

model is the current for wide carriage printing, the 2200 is the one with more

permanent pigment based inks). Whatever, the printer cost me about $450.

<br><br>

You should also budget for ink and paper. I plan to buy a colorimeter and calibration

software soon too (about $250 for the Gretag-Macbeth Eye One Display package).

<br><br>

With sufficient time and skill, results are superb. The photo above was scanned with

this equipment from a Minox 8x11mm negative and makes a beautiful 6x8" print.

Getting good B&W prints is much harder than getting similar quality color prints...

<br><br>

Godfrey

[timothy_nelson]

Since you are committed to film, I'd suggest getting the best film scanner you can

afford, even if it uses up your printer budget for now. This is an even more important

link in your image chain than your enlarger lens is/was. I also urge you do drive your

scanner with Vuescan software. From my experience, it takes the best advantage of

Nikon (and probably other) scanners. I didn't discover what my scanner was capable

of doing until I ditched the Nikon software and switched to Vuescan. If you have been

a darkroom printer, it will be a revelation how much more you can get from your

negatives (B&W and color) by scanning than you have been used to. As others have

posted, there will be a significant learning curve once you get to inkjet printing,

especially B&W, but it will come eventually. With a high quality (4000 dpi) scanner,

you will enjoy your images right away on your monitor. Vuescan lets you adjust your

scanned image just like you would with a digicam or RAW converter (white balance,

color profile, clipping, etc), before you get to Photoshop.

[EricM]

Johan, of course there's a huge difference...in price, a key subject in this post.

[terry_rory]

Thanks to everyone for the huge response to this question and the wealth of ideas (lots of good ideas to look into) and opinions. I knew I was right to ask on this forum!

 

I will only be scanning 35mm negs/individual mounted 35mm slides.

 

I just started using my Rolleicord VB mk2 seriously, after months of ownership, and have had the results put on CD which (for MF) is more cost effective for me than a full blown medium format scanner.

 

I am going to print this thread and go and do some research on prices / availability / reviews etc.

 

I do not think it would be financially appropriate (after the cost of new PC, scanner, printer, paper, inks etc) to go for a latest release of Photoshop. I think I will use the latest release of Paintshop pro which is a fraction of the price. I am not heavily into the idea of digital manipulation and I think Paintshop will give me what I need at least for now.

 

I had not even considered Minolta Dimage machines so that is something to seriously look into as 'last years' machines are still in our shops here in the UK for a lot less than the Nikon coolscan V ED.

 

I also have to give serious thought to costing out inks/papers etc.

 

Thanks again everyone.