mikeengles

I am just amazed at this little bird's stamina and persistence. It seemed to do this pretty well the whole day. till I attached the perch

Have not seen any birds on the feeders today, but a lot yesterday. A stinking day today in London, did they know?

MDE

Strange experience with a Long tailed tit

Obsessive Long Tailed Tit: Nature and Wildlife Photography Forum: Digital Photography Review

So if you used the two devices and in each case used software to get the best results you can in a reasonable amount of time, which do you think comes out best? (And do you think there’s enough difference to notice in real use, e.g. on screen or in print?)

If you have a DSLR, go that way. Otherwise the Epson is fine. You can print quite large, but don't get to close.

The Epson is versatile. Alternatively, there are really cheap 35mm slide scanners around, that will outdo the Epson. The Epson resolution is barely 3200DPI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fmC5U5aiclw.

This person has something interesting to say on the subject

Well that is for others to judge. I did this to satisfy myself and possibly to answer the question that turns up on all forums, DSLR scanning v Flatbed scanner.

It depends on what you want to do? I am scanning 20 years of very variable family pictures, which will never be printed, but could be printed to 10x8.

I choose the screen grab, as it seemed the most democratic. Also I don't want to see the grain, as long as its sharp enough.

My experiment shows that in my situation, the two methods are pretty well equal.

In the end the limiting factor is the film resolution and also how well focused the original picture was.

I was lucky when I took the picture more than 30 years ago, that I actually got the eyes sharp.

Usually one was lucky to get 1 good one in 36. So many films thrown away.

All the best

Here is a caparison between a Epson V800 scan and a 'scan' done with a Canon 5D3, Olympus bellows with slide copier, an OM Zuiko 80mm Macro, the same lens and combination that took the picture of a dragonfly in the Dordogne France in 1986 on Ektachrome 64.

The Canon picture is larger (below) so has been resized to approximate the size of the Epson result.

I have processed them both in Lightroom

Epson flat, no sharpening at all, scanned using Epson Scan, Auto exposure to get the grey balance, slackened the highs and lows in the histogram and brighten the mid tone. No ICE 3200DPI 48 bit exported from Lightroom to Photoshop

Canon I resized, tried to match tonally, also no sharpening. The Canon has too much contrast as Raw.

The original film has resolved the eyes, so I have 100% screen grabs of the area.

I used Live view, magnified the area x10, used the bellows to focus on the eyes, stopped down to F8 and after a few test exposures used this one.

I can post the images separately if required.

PS the Epson scan is a a little narrower than the Canon, as it seems its vertical and horizontal resolutions are different.

The cheaper Silverfast that comes with the V800, does not deliver 48 bit scans. It works 48 bit internally, but outputs 24 bit

I have the V800 and used to have a Nikon LS50. The LS 50 is very slow. The V800 scans a 3mm slide. at 3200dpi in 2 mins.

I find that the V800 does no more than 3200 dpi possibly slightly less. I use Epson scan as a standalone, batching scanning and then import all the scans into Lightroom. It is much easier to look at the thumbnails and then get a consistent result. I am doing a long term project od scanning 20 years worth od negative sand slides, so speed is important. I was using a Epson 4780, but that was also too slow. I scan at 3200, but only make 3000x200 tiffs and then smaller jpegs.

I think that the V800, with extra holders is the best solution.Some Examples

processing negatives in Lightroom

Scans of a slide on on V800 and one on a Nikon LS50, which I old some 8 years ago

The V800 is pretty good.

Two scans one with a Epson V800 and the other with a Nikon LS50.

The Nikon sac was done many years ago as I do not have it any more.

PS

A scan on a V800 from a negative

https://g3.img-dpreview.com/CA59C03AC2F640A7A76F034ED8FDD3F2.jpg

The Epson V 850/V800 are pretty usable up to 3200DPI. The real advantage is that they are quick and will get through a lot of work

You can calibrate the focus, to maximize the sharpness. I process in Lightroom, and use Epson scan, in essence as a RAW scanner, employing very loose settings.

This is from a Ektchrome 35mm slide taken in 1979. I used to have a LS50, but sold it because I had to scan several thousand images. The LS50 was much too slow.

I am perfectly happy with my V800 and keep within its limitations

NDE

My 6 years old Epson V700 just bit the dust, and I'm considering buying an Epson V850, but I'm curious, what else would you guys recommend in the 800-1000 dollar price range?

I mainly scan medium format negatives, occasionally some 35mm negs as well.

Thank you!

I recommend against compressed TIFF files. There seems to be no real consensus regarding TIFF compression, hence poor compatibility. Besides, 6 MP images aren't going to clog the system.

Hello

I accept what you say about compressed tiffs and size. I have used these kind of tiffs for nearly 30 years and have never had a problem. All the applications I have see then and use them as do Win 7 and Win 10.

They as far as I know use LZW, which is one of the oldest and most compatible form of data compression.

Dedicated slide/negative scanners are too slow if you have a lot of work to get through. I had a Nikon LS50, sold it bought a Epson V800 and extra

film holders. I calibrated it to get the best scans. It uses a system of adjustable feet.

I just use EpsonScan which will batch scan 18 frames , so can do a 36exp film in about 2 hours, with ICE 3200dpi and 48bit

I make RAW scans with minimal processing, leaving head room. I post process in Lightroom, rendering the frames as 3000x2000pixel 8 bit compressed tiffs

I am about to embark on scanning my boxes of 35 mm color slides using a Plustek 7300i scanner. I've read a lot of comments about how using a DSLR with a macro lens is superior but for various reasons I've decided not to do that. Anyway, I've got two questions: one, has anyone had experience with the multi-exposure technique that I believe is part of the Silverfast software? And two, what are some good naming conventions that work, or those that don't work? Thanks

I scan everything as long as it is scannable, using a Epson V800 and Epson scan. I have the negatives bundled in years and the film number eg 1-15.

For say year 1990 I scan in quarters, eg 1990_ Film1_Q1 etc and the frames are_frames.

So the scans are

1_1990_Q1_Film 1_01.tiff onwards,

2_1990_Q1_Film 2_01.tiff onwards

5_1990_Q2_Film 5_01.tiff onwards

In Epson scan I do an auto exposure, then slacken the hi and los,to leave some headroom.3200dpi 48bit Tiffs

Next I import into Lightroom and process the films to taste.

I render them, to a different drive

as 1990_Q1_Film_1_01.tiff etc

1990_Q2_Film 5_01.tiff etc

I render as 3000x2000pixel 8 bit compressed tiff.

Lastly I go through all the pictures in the rendered folder and add the names of the people in the frame or the place and make

4 folders one for each quarter of 1990, renaming them consecutively

Say 1989_Q1 and the pictures in the folder renamed eg

1989_Q1_001_Kate Catherine Nicola Q P.tif

1989_Q1_002_Paul's Ted.tif

for all pictures in Q1,Q2,Q3, and Q4.

This system means I always have the 'RAW' scans and also rendered scans with some data.

I do slides the same way.

I have nothing worth multiscanning, I do have Silverfast, but rarely use it.

My system is for scanning family pictures.

I hope this is clear and hope it helps

PS If I need jpegs, I import the rendered tiff into Lightroon and batch the jpegs and down size if necessary

Hello

As a post script I do have a Nikon FA SLR. Are the FA and D70 bayonets the same, apart from metering.

I do have Olympus macro lenses.

Mike Engles

Hello

I have a Olympus OM series bellows and slide copying attachment.

I have a lot Of darkish Kodachromes, that I would like to digitise.

I wonder if it was possible to attach a adapter to a Nikon D70 so

that I can use it on the Olympus bellows.

The bellows connects to a OM camera by a Olympus bayonet. This is

only body sided. The bellows side is a tube that has a circular

groove that fits into the bellows aperture and is secured by a screw.

This allows the body to rotate in the bellows

I realise that no metering would be possible, but I could guess

exposure and use bracketing.

Does or could such a adapter exist?

The diameter of the bellows aperture is about 52mm, which in Nikon

terms is a usefull size.

I do have a Nikon Ls50 scanner, but the Kodachromes are pretty

difficult and very slow. I have been considering buying a D70.

Here is a link to the bellows.

http://www.btinternet.com/~mike.engles/mike/Nikonadap.jpg

Mike Engles