Newbie Using Scanner (for slides)- Concerned about Memory

[Martin]

Hello,

I've steered clear of scanners till now but have on approval Canon 3200F
scanner which I want to use for slides and negatives although I
understand from reviews the results often aren't very good with this
scanner.

I am concerned about the amount of memory/ hard disc activity used when
scanning and wondered what a good compromise would be as regards size of
print that can be expected from a slide or negative. Can anyone help me
on this ?

Also generally does scanner software cause problems to other parts of
Windows when uninstalled, i.e. if it doesn't remove all files etc. ?

Thanks.

Martin

 

[Wayne Fulton]

Hello,

I've steered clear of scanners till now but have on approval Canon 3200F
scanner which I want to use for slides and negatives although I
understand from reviews the results often aren't very good with this
scanner.

I am concerned about the amount of memory/ hard disc activity used when
scanning and wondered what a good compromise would be as regards size of
print that can be expected from a slide or negative. Can anyone help me
on this ?

Also generally does scanner software cause problems to other parts of
Windows when uninstalled, i.e. if it doesn't remove all files etc. ?

Both Microsoft XP and the Canon 3200F recommend at least 128MB memory.
For the largest images, you'd much rather have 256MB.
If doing large images every day, you'd rather have 512MB.
35 mm film at 3200 dpi is nearly 40 MB. The scanning is less memory
issue than the photo editor processing, and 256MB is certainly not too
much today. You will want a few GB empty and available on your disk.

The ratio of scanning resolution/printing resolution is the print
enlargement factor, so to scan at 3200 dpi and print at 300 dpi is
3200/300 = about 10X enlargement, which allows 8x10 inches from 35 mm
(about 1.4x0.92 inches), with modest cropping possible. Or this ratio
says you could print 16x20 inches at 150 dpi (which is reasonable for
16x20 inch prints).

However that is only about the numbers, and a real film scanner would be
the right tool for the largest prints (more sharpness). I have not used
that scanner, but with any of this type of flatbed scanner, I'd plan on
smaller prints like 6x4 inches being better quality (from 35 mm film
size).

If scanning slides just for the video screen, then you need smaller
images (that can fit on the screen), and 600 to 800 dpi should be
plenty, more like 2 MB, no big deal regarding memory.

I didnt understand the uninstall concern, but it should not be any
problem.

 

[Rowan Crowe]

Hello,

I've steered clear of scanners till now but have on approval Canon 3200F
scanner which I want to use for slides and negatives although I
understand from reviews the results often aren't very good with this
scanner.

One other thing you need to consider: flatbed scans of negatives and
transparencies are inferior to a dedicated film scanner. I purchased
my 5000F in order to create a "digital archive" of all my negatives,
but the quality is nowhere good enough for that. With some negatives
it's impossible to create an acceptable 6x4" print, even when scanned
at the full 2400dpi resolution.

As well as the scan coming out somewhat blurry, detail in the shadow
areas is blacked out, presumably because it's outside of the dynamic
range of the sensor. This happens on both negative AND positive
transparencies. This is what you notice more than the softness of the
scan. One particularly difficult image is a shot where the subject's
face is at the point of overexposure (brightest possible) - no matter
how much I fiddle with levels I cannot get the scanner to resolve the
detail in her dark blue jumper without horribly overexposing and
washing out her facial features. If I expose for her face then the
jumper ends up looking black.

The other issue with the 5000F is that it has no negative presets,
which means that the same shot taken on two different types of films
will scan with different colour casts, since different brands have
different shades of orange. If you don't have white or grey in the
image as a reference it can be difficult to properly correct colours.

Finally, the specs say the 3200F is a 1200x2400dpi scanner, whilst the
5000F has 2400x4800dpi resolution. Let's just say that I am not very
impressed with the quality of negative/positive scans on the 5000F, so
I don't think you'll have much luck with the lower resolution 3200F...

I didn't know much about scanning fundamentals and limitations of
flatbed scanners before I purchased the 5000F. I wouldn't do it again,
I'd go straight for a dedicated film scanner.

 

[John Scott Mccoy]

Both Microsoft XP and the Canon 3200F recommend at least 128MB memory.
For the largest images, you'd much rather have 256MB.
If doing large images every day, you'd rather have 512MB.
35 mm film at 3200 dpi is nearly 40 MB. The scanning is less memory
issue than the photo editor processing, and 256MB is certainly not too
much today. You will want a few GB empty and available on your disk.

The ratio of scanning resolution/printing resolution is the print
enlargement factor, so to scan at 3200 dpi and print at 300 dpi is
3200/300 = about 10X enlargement, which allows 8x10 inches from 35 mm
(about 1.4x0.92 inches), with modest cropping possible. Or this ratio
says you could print 16x20 inches at 150 dpi (which is reasonable for
16x20 inch prints).

However that is only about the numbers, and a real film scanner would be
the right tool for the largest prints (more sharpness). I have not used
that scanner, but with any of this type of flatbed scanner, I'd plan on
smaller prints like 6x4 inches being better quality (from 35 mm film
size).

If scanning slides just for the video screen, then you need smaller
images (that can fit on the screen), and 600 to 800 dpi should be
plenty, more like 2 MB, no big deal regarding memory.

I didnt understand the uninstall concern, but it should not be any
problem.

I posted a question here about scanning slides without using a 'slide
scanner' attachment or a dedicated slide scanner. Got no response so I
did quite a bit of 'inventive testing.'

I seem to have hit upon a winner by using a photographers 'light box' -
the same kind used by slide photographers to light up slides on the
white translucent plastic surface from below. I inverted the light box
and placed it over the slides lying on the scanner surface (I'm using a
HP3500C scanner - nothing unusual about that scanner) and scanned the
slides with the scanner in a normal fashion (lid up) - inverted light
box shining light from above.

I'm putting all the slide images on CDs and DVDs - no issue with memory
there!

I think the light box cost me about $60 a few years ago.

I've scanned over a thousand slides, so far, and am very happy with the
results.

Scott

I can be reached at:
(e-mail address removed)

*REMOVE* all three ing inserts.

 

[Martin]

Thanks everyone for your replys to my query. I've printed them and will
refer when I next use the scanner.

Martin.