B&W/color negative scanners

[Jack]

This request is from a nubee, so it may be same-old/same-old to the
experienced folks out there. I'm looking for a dedicated film
scanner--35mm and 120 capable--that works well with b&w negs. And
certain software applications (whatever they may be) that are critical
to quality output for 11x14 and 16x20 prints.

So, I'd very much appreciate advice on brands--Epson, Microtec,
Minolta, Nikon, etc; light sources--LED, fluorescent;
software--Vuescan, etc; and whatever other options I haven't thought of
so far. Pricewise, since a friend will split the cost, I'm willing to
spend up to $1500 or so (understanding that higher price doesn't
necessarily mean better quality).

I will be using a Mac G5 and Photoshop CS. I don't have a printer yet,
but am guessing Epson 2200.
Thank you for any advice you can send my way!!!

Jack

 

[Charlie]

This request is from a nubee, so it may be same-old/same-old to the
experienced folks out there. I'm looking for a dedicated film
scanner--35mm and 120 capable--that works well with b&w negs. And
certain software applications (whatever they may be) that are critical
to quality output for 11x14 and 16x20 prints.

So, I'd very much appreciate advice on brands--Epson, Microtec,
Minolta, Nikon, etc; light sources--LED, fluorescent;
software--Vuescan, etc; and whatever other options I haven't thought of
so far. Pricewise, since a friend will split the cost, I'm willing to
spend up to $1500 or so (understanding that higher price doesn't
necessarily mean better quality).

I will be using a Mac G5 and Photoshop CS. I don't have a printer yet,
but am guessing Epson 2200.
Thank you for any advice you can send my way!!!

Jack

Higher price doesn't necessarily mean higher quality, but lower price
"usually" means lower quality. I have an Epson 3780 and a Nikon LS-IV.
The Epson gives "acceptable" (for me) results on 120 film, but I'd
hesitate to try it for professional work. The Nikon gives "good"
results for 35 mm film.

If you have a budget and the need to do both 35mm and 120, then you
have to get both a film scanner and a good flatbed..... a good flatbed
alone just won't do it for 35mm.

The B&W isn't an issue, except that it makes d-ICE less of a
consideration, since all scanners do both B&W and color.

Light sources are a personal preference, so whatever anyone says may
or may not fit your preferences....you need to try several and see for
yourself. Software is similar, except that Vuescan is generally highly
regarded as a good budget approach. If money is no object, then there
are other considerations. software supplied with the scanner is also
sometimes acceptable.... but sometimes horrible. Kind of like light
sources, you have to try it out to see what you're comfortable with.
Charlie Hoffpauir
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~charlieh/

 

[Don]

This request is from a nubee, so it may be same-old/same-old to the
experienced folks out there. I'm looking for a dedicated film
scanner--35mm and 120 capable--that works well with b&w negs. And
certain software applications (whatever they may be) that are critical
to quality output for 11x14 and 16x20 prints.

So, I'd very much appreciate advice on brands--Epson, Microtec,
Minolta, Nikon, etc; light sources--LED, fluorescent;
software--Vuescan, etc; and whatever other options I haven't thought of
so far. Pricewise, since a friend will split the cost, I'm willing to
spend up to $1500 or so (understanding that higher price doesn't
necessarily mean better quality).

The main difference between conventional light sources and LEDs is
that LEDs don't deteriorate over time, while other light sources tend
to fade. LEDs are practically guaranteed to outlast both the scanner
and the user... ;o)

Also, LEDs produce a much sharper image which is both a blessing and a
curse. While this will resolve detail far better than convention light
sources (which tend to blur the image somewhat) LEDs will also show
grain much more.

Finally, LEDs are a "pure" light source so there is no need for
filters (as is the case for other light sources). The fewer things
there are between the image and the CCD, the better.

On the negative (sic) side, LEDs have a narrow depth of field so
curved film will be a bit of a nightmare to focus. This can be fixed
in a variety of ways, from using a film holder to the extreme case of
chopping up all negatives and putting them into slide holders with
anti-Newton glass to hold the film flat.

Since you will be doing B&W film the wonderful ICE will not be of much
use.

I personally would stay away from VueScan as far as possible because
it's far too buggy and unreliable. However, it may be OK for a quick
and dirty job if all you want to do afterwards is print. You can try
it for free (www.hamrick.com) but I believe it will watermark you
scans.

I will be using a Mac G5 and Photoshop CS. I don't have a printer yet,
but am guessing Epson 2200.

I don't print but only scan for archiving purposes and viewing on the
screen, so I'll let others comment on that.

The only thing I noticed is that if your sole goal is printing the
required scan resolution is actually quite low. Be sure to get a rule
of thumb on this so you don't waste money on resolution you'll never
use.

Don.

 

[Jack]

Charlie and Don--
Thank you for your good advice!!
Jack