Flat bed Scanners

I realise that this may sound like heresy to some participants in this forum, but here goes anyhow...

Does anyone have any positive experience to share with the rest of us on the subject of flat bed scanners with film scanning capability?

I would love to buy a separate film scanner, but as I also require a document scanner, the possibility of combining the two items in one seems irresistible.

Any help would be appreciated.
--
David Barker

David,

I have an Epson Perfection 1240 Photo scanner. I'm planning to replace it with an Epson 2450. I scan 35mm, 6x6 cm and 4x5 negs and trans. I also scan very old negatives that I have inherited from my family.

My scanner does a fine job with 6x6 and larger negatives. I've gotten a decent 7x10 from a 35mm B&W negative, but usually I'm happy with 35mm only up to 4x6. I have some 8x10's from 4x5 which are as good, if not better than wet lab prints made with an $800 el Nikkor enlarging lens.

From what I've read, the 2450 does a much better job and you can get 13x19 prints from 35mm. Do a search on the Epson 2450 and read the reviews.

I was on the verge of purchasing a Canoscan 4000. Of course, it will only handle my 35mm. I'm just not in a position to drop $3-5K on 4x5 film scanner. Now I think I'll buy the 2450 and see if the results suit my needs. It has an added bonus for me. I can scan up to 4x9. I have some 100 year old pano negatives that are 2x7. Now I don't have to stitch them together.

I'm also looking forward to the new Epson printer that's designed for printing both color and B&W. With these two items, I think I'll be in a position to shut down my wet lab.

Regards,
Doug

David Barker said:

I realise that this may sound like heresy to some participants in
this forum, but here goes anyhow...

Does anyone have any positive experience to share with the rest of
us on the subject of flat bed scanners with film scanning
capability?

I would love to buy a separate film scanner, but as I also require
a document scanner, the possibility of combining the two items in
one seems irresistible.

Any help would be appreciated.
--
David Barker

Click to expand...

David Barker said:

I realise that this may sound like heresy to some participants in
this forum, but here goes anyhow...

Does anyone have any positive experience to share with the rest of
us on the subject of flat bed scanners with film scanning
capability?

I would love to buy a separate film scanner, but as I also require
a document scanner, the possibility of combining the two items in
one seems irresistible.

Any help would be appreciated.

Click to expand...

Sorry to be so negative, but - DON'T DO IT!

Flatbeds don't have the resolution to scan film, even if you find one with a 'film adapter', which is usually just a couple of mirrors or a prism.

On the other hand, cheap flatbeds have become really very good, and I would suggest a dedicated film scanner, plus a cheap flatbed for your documents.

If you want a very useful site on all things scanning, do visit Wayne Fultons'

http://www.scantips.com

Hope this is of use,
--
batty.

I've gotta agree! Especially since Minolta has an execellant film scanner that scans at 2850 dpi. That and an inexpensive flatbed like the canoscan series from Canon make life very good in my studio.

batty said:

Sorry to be so negative, but - DON'T DO IT!

Flatbeds don't have the resolution to scan film, even if you find
one with a 'film adapter', which is usually just a couple of
mirrors or a prism.

On the other hand, cheap flatbeds have become really very good, and
I would suggest a dedicated film scanner, plus a cheap flatbed for
your documents.

If you want a very useful site on all things scanning, do visit
Wayne Fultons'

http://www.scantips.com

Hope this is of use,
--
batty.

Click to expand...

I also agree. Transparency adapters do not give the required dpi. You need an absolute minimum of 1900 dpi for a 35mm, preferably much higher. A good flatbed can be purchased for under $200. Don't be fooled by specs that give 2400 x 600 or 3600 by 1200. The lower number is the real scan dpi. The higher number is done by double stepping the horizonatal pass.

Dave

gLeckenby said:

I've gotta agree! Especially since Minolta has an execellant film
scanner that scans at 2850 dpi. That and an inexpensive flatbed
like the canoscan series from Canon make life very good in my
studio.

Click to expand...

David,

If you plan to scan much film, a dedicated film scanner would be best.

If you are juggling cash, the Epson 2450 is a superb compromise,
offering several adaptors for slides, film negatives, etc.

I am slowly ( very slowly ! ) digitizing old family photos, B&W from the
early 19th century and the results from the 2450 have been stunning,
with prints better than the originals.

Check out a 2450 review
http://www.pcworld.com/reviews/article/0,aid,71983,00.asp

Good Luck,
Keith

--
http://www.pbase.com/keith2

'if you want to walk on water, you've got to get out of the boat'

David, I don't have one, but someone else on this forum (I'm going to have to try to locate the email he sent me with his pbase link) has an Epson 1650, the precursor to the 2450, and his scans of slides are terrific. Not sure if your email address is posted, but mine is - send me your email address and I'll forward the email when I find it (really, you'll want to see these)
--
Davia
C-700
pbase supporter
http://www.pbase.com/dmlove

I just got the Epson 2450 scanner and it does a very good job on my 4x5 transparencies. I haven't tried it on any of my 35mm slides, but would agree with the other posters that it may not be the best way to scan 35mm negatives. As always, of course, it depends on your final purpose.

Here's a pretty decent review of the 2450. http://www.virtualtraveller.org/epson2450.htm

--
Larrym

Larry Mendenhall said:

I just got the Epson 2450 scanner and it does a very good job on my
4x5 transparencies. I haven't tried it on any of my 35mm slides,
but would agree with the other posters that it may not be the best
way to scan 35mm negatives. As always, of course, it depends on
your final purpose.

Here's a pretty decent review of the 2450.
http://www.virtualtraveller.org/epson2450.htm

--
Larrym

Click to expand...

I've had this scanner for a couple of months now, and it's fantastic! I won't argue that dedicated film scanners aren't better, but a) a lot of those proclammations had been made in reviews before the higher-resolution flatbeds came out, and b) depending on your application a veru high-dpi film scanner may be overkill.

I use SilverFast for scanning the negs.

--
-- Lynn

David, here's the link I mentioned to you earlier - it shows scanned in slides that were not even from a 35mm camera; according to John,--

Here it is,

BTW these sample images were originally from a rather cheap 120 mm film camera in the 60's. I occasionally had slides made instead of printed images. None were made by a 35mm camera as far as I can remember, I didn't own one till the 80's or 90's... I would expect 35mm slides to be even better.
John

http://www.pbase.com/johnd1/old_slides_scanned

Davia
C-700
pbase supporter
http://www.pbase.com/dmlove

This is off topic, but I poked around in your sample gallery and looked at some of your other photos. Forgive my ignorance, but is an S02 a camera?
Was the picture below a digital original? I like the quality a lot.

My thanks to everyone who has responded to my initial question. Your feedback has been helpful, and has given me food for thought as well as some interesting links to follow.

I have been uncomfortable with the "wet chemistry" side of photography (from an environmental as well as a practical point of view) for a while, and I sense that technically we are now near to an affordable series of solutions (excuse the pun) which use digital techniques in place of the traditional ones. We're not there yet, but within 5 years digital cameras will genuinely compete on both price and resolution with film.

Printers seem to have made huge strides recently, and the scanners seem to be available to bridge the gap between our stocks of old negs/slides/prints and digital storage/output. I just need to make the correct choice for my (scanning) needs...

Thanks again.

--
David Barker

A general question: do any of the flatbed scanners yet incorporate Digital ICE, ROC, GEM? Have any manufacturer's hinted at this? If so, you may want to pursue this angle.

Gene

--
http://www.NorthernJourney.com/

This is the all important variable in this question!
If it's 35mm then a dedicated film scanner
from Nikon, Canon, or Minolta would be best.
But these can't do the reflective scans you need.
If it's medium and/or large format film scanning
then price becomes THE most important issue.
Since you want to combine film with reflective
scanning your most cost effective choice is by
far the Epson 2450. It's real easy to confirm
this for yourself. Just ask Google for Epson
2450 scanner reviews and it will drop all the
information you need onto your desktop.
Be sure to check out the Cnet user opinions
on this scanner.

The new Canon D1250U2F scanner incorporates Canon's integrated Quick Automatic Retouching and Enhancement technology (QARE) automatically removes dirt and scratches from images while STAD technology (Stabilized Tone-curve Auto Drawing) instinctively corrects tone and gamma fields and optimizes highlights and shadows. Richer, more robust images are at your fingertips.

jb

Gene Wilburn said:

A general question: do any of the flatbed scanners yet incorporate
Digital ICE, ROC, GEM? Have any manufacturer's hinted at this? If
so, you may want to pursue this angle.

Gene

--
http://www.NorthernJourney.com/

Click to expand...

Johnnycb said:

The new Canon D1250U2F scanner incorporates Canon's integrated
Quick Automatic Retouching and Enhancement technology (QARE)
automatically removes dirt and scratches from images while STAD
technology (Stabilized Tone-curve Auto Drawing) instinctively
corrects tone and gamma fields and optimizes highlights and
shadows. Richer, more robust images are at your fingertips.

Click to expand...

Wow, you should get a job in Canon's marketing dept!

Or perhaps you already have?
--
David Barker

David Barker said:

Johnnycb said:

The new Canon D1250U2F scanner incorporates Canon's integrated
Quick Automatic Retouching and Enhancement technology (QARE)
automatically removes dirt and scratches from images while STAD
technology (Stabilized Tone-curve Auto Drawing) instinctively
corrects tone and gamma fields and optimizes highlights and
shadows. Richer, more robust images are at your fingertips.

Click to expand...

Wow, you should get a job in Canon's marketing dept!

Or perhaps you already have?

Click to expand...

Man ... I gotta have one of those ... I always wanted something Instinctive, Optimizing, Richer and more ROBUST.

(And at my FINGERTIPS ???)

David Barker91965 said:

--
David Barker

Click to expand...

--
Thanks for reading .... JoePhoto

( Do You Ever STOP to THINK --- and FORGET to START Again ??? )

Kidding aside, has anyone had their hands on one of these new Canon scanners and have any feedback to offer to the forum? Is it in the same class as Epson 2450?

Gene

JoePhoto said:

David Barker said:

Johnnycb said:

The new Canon D1250U2F scanner incorporates Canon's integrated
Quick Automatic Retouching and Enhancement technology (QARE)
automatically removes dirt and scratches from images while STAD
technology (Stabilized Tone-curve Auto Drawing) instinctively
corrects tone and gamma fields and optimizes highlights and
shadows. Richer, more robust images are at your fingertips.

Click to expand...

Wow, you should get a job in Canon's marketing dept!

Or perhaps you already have?

Click to expand...

Man ... I gotta have one of those ... I always wanted something
Instinctive, Optimizing, Richer and more ROBUST.

(And at my FINGERTIPS ???)

JoePhoto said:

--
David Barker

Click to expand...

--
Thanks for reading .... JoePhoto

( Do You Ever STOP to THINK --- and FORGET to START Again ??? )

Click to expand...

--
http://www.NorthernJourney.com/

I got my first scanner in 1988. It really only cost chump change - $1800. It was a GREAT machine and a Canon no less. It was VERY fast, powerful and state of the art. It could scan it many, many colors, ok it could scan in just two colors, black and white. But It worked and laid to shame all those hand held jobs - Hah!

Have things gotten better?

Dave

David Barkin said:

I got my first scanner in 1988. It really only cost chump change -
$1800. It was a GREAT machine and a Canon no less. It was VERY
fast, powerful and state of the art. It could scan it many, many
colors, ok it could scan in just two colors, black and white. But
It worked and laid to shame all those hand held jobs - Hah!

Have things gotten better?

Dave

Click to expand...

Dave,

Tell us young folks some more stories about the good ol' days.
--
David Barker