scanner for B&W negs

[Jack]

I have scads of old B&W negs (Kodak panatomic-, plus- and tri-x)and
Kodachrome slides that I want to scan and make 8x10 and 11x14 prints. I
read that B&W scans are problematic: Digital ICE doesn't work; VueScan
is the way to go; scan the negs as color images, etc. Many of the negs
were produced in less-developed countries under marginal lab
conditions.

I'd also like to invest in a higher end scanner, e.g. the Minolta
Dimage Scan Multi Pro, with its diffusion-type light source,
multi-format ability and high dpi (ppi?). I've ruled out Nikon scanners
because they use LEDs. One source says the Polaroid SS4000 is good for
B&W. This unit may not be around anymore.

Since my real experience is zero, I want to benefit from advice from
folks who know scanning. That way, I should be able to limit my
mistakes to new ones never before thought of.

Thank you. Jack Prebis

 

[Charlie]

I have scads of old B&W negs (Kodak panatomic-, plus- and tri-x)and
Kodachrome slides that I want to scan and make 8x10 and 11x14 prints. I
read that B&W scans are problematic:

? I don't understand this statement. Exactly what do you mean?

Digital ICE doesn't work;

Well, that's because of the silver in the film. Digital ICE also does
not work well with Kodachrome.

VueScan
is the way to go;

Vuescan is very good, but this statement has nothing to do with the
previous statements.

scan the negs as color images, etc.

I don't think I've ever seen any one recommend this, and can see no
reason for it either.

Many of the negs
were produced in less-developed countries under marginal lab
conditions.

Does this mean poorly developed, not properly fixed, or full of dust
and fingerprints? It's doubtful that you'll get a good picture from a
poor negative with *any* scanner. You'll find that your "post
processing" software is more important than the scanner if the
negatives are dirty.

I'd also like to invest in a higher end scanner, e.g. the Minolta
Dimage Scan Multi Pro, with its diffusion-type light source,
multi-format ability and high dpi (ppi?). I've ruled out Nikon scanners
because they use LEDs.

Thousands of people disagree with this assessment.

One source says the Polaroid SS4000 is good for
B&W. This unit may not be around anymore.

Since my real experience is zero, I want to benefit from advice from
folks who know scanning. That way, I should be able to limit my
mistakes to new ones never before thought of.

You should spend some time at www.scantips.com

Thank you. Jack Prebis

Charlie Hoffpauir
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~charlieh/

 

[Hecate]

? I don't understand this statement. Exactly what do you mean?
Well, that's because of the silver in the film. Digital ICE also does
not work well with Kodachrome.
Vuescan is very good, but this statement has nothing to do with the
previous statements.

Down the post you mention Minolta so Vuescan is *definitely not* the
way to go.

I don't think I've ever seen any one recommend this, and can see no
reason for it either.

I've seen it, and indeed do it myself. It helps prevent the clipping
which occurs in some scanners.

 

[Charlie]

Down the post you mention Minolta so Vuescan is *definitely not* the
way to go.

Well, I don't have a Minolta, so I can't say if the claimed
compatibility isn't there. But Ed claims that these Minoltas are
compatible with Vuescan.

# QuickScan 35
# Konica Qscan
# Scan Dual
# Scan Dual II
# Scan Dual III
# Scan Dual IV
# Scan Elite
# Scan Elite II
# Scan Elite 5400
# Scan Multi
# Scan Multi II
# Scan Multi Pro
# Scan Speed

I've seen it, and indeed do it myself. It helps prevent the clipping
which occurs in some scanners.

Interesting. This is really the first time I've seen this mentioned.
I'd like to learn more about it... if others are doing this, if only
with some scanners, if only when using 8 bit mode, etc.

Hecate - The Real One
(e-mail address removed)
veni, vidi, reliqui

Charlie Hoffpauir
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~charlieh/

 

[Hecate]

Well, I don't have a Minolta, so I can't say if the claimed
compatibility isn't there. But Ed claims that these Minoltas are
compatible with Vuescan.

Yes, and we had this discussion a lot in this group. The operative
word in that sentence is "claims".

Interesting. This is really the first time I've seen this mentioned.
I'd like to learn more about it... if others are doing this, if only
with some scanners, if only when using 8 bit mode, etc.

The Minolta can have a problem, with highlight and shadow clipping if
you scan a B&W as B&W. This is often reduced or eliminat4ed if you
scan the B&W as colour.

 

[Charlie]

Yes, and we had this discussion a lot in this group. The operative
word in that sentence is "claims".

The Minolta can have a problem, with highlight and shadow clipping if
you scan a B&W as B&W. This is often reduced or eliminat4ed if you
scan the B&W as colour.

--

Hecate - The Real One
(e-mail address removed)
veni, vidi, reliqui

Thanks for the additional information. I guess since I don't have a
Minolta, I was just not reading the posts about the problems seen with
Vuescan and Minolta.
Charlie Hoffpauir
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~charlieh/

 

[Don]

Indeed! He's very quick to "claim" a lot of things but throws a temper
tantrum when presented with objective proof to the contrary (and
doesn't shy from obscenities, either).

Thanks for the additional information. I guess since I don't have a
Minolta, I was just not reading the posts about the problems seen with
Vuescan and Minolta.

It's not just the Minolta. Similar VueScan bugs (streaking) have been
reported on the Nikon LS-50.

VueScan is basically riddled with bugs. If you stick around, you'll
see all sorts of problems. Particular bugs may hide for a while but
then inevitably return with people constantly scrambling for older
versions where, this or that, still pretended to work.

In a word: "VueBug" is a mess! ;o)

Or, should that be "VueScam"? ;o)

Don.