|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
tomm42
Guest
|
 Posted: Mon Jun 04, 2007 6:29 pm Post subject: Re: Film scanner question |
 |
|
On Jun 1, 11:18 pm, Barry Watzman <WatzmanNOS...@neo.rr.com> wrote:
| Quote: | I have a project that involves scanning a large number of 35mm negatives
(high hundreds to perhaps as many as several thousand).
One of the things I'm considering is buying a film scanner. The plan
would be to buy it, do the job, and resell it on E-Bay. Effectively
"renting" it for the difference between what I pay and what I get for it.
I looked at the Nikon 5000, but I'm put off by the price ($900 to $1,100).
To those of you who are knowledgeable about this subject, what about the
Nikon LS-50? This is half the cost of the 5000. What are the relative
benefits and drawbacks?
Also, anyone know anything about "ScanCafe"? They apparently do
scanning for 19 cents per slide, 4000 dpi, digital ICE and you only have
to actually buy the "good" images after looking at previews online.
However, turnaround is 6 weeks.
[FWIW, Sam's Club does them for 18 cents, but the resolution is low
(1800 x 1200, about 2 megapixels) and they don't have digital ICE or any
other enhancement ... it's a bare-bones straight scan. But the quality
is not bad within those limitations (although 2MP is a pretty severe
limitation), the turnaround is fast (24 hours for 100 images) and the
original media is never more than an hour from my home).]
Comments welcome.
|
Look at the Epson V700, $550, decent sharpness, dynamic range, Digital
Ice, takes 4 strips of negs at a time. Will nominally scan up to
6400ppi but 3200 is the realistic max. This scanner really does
compare favorably to stand alone film scanners, The LS5000 is better,
but at 3X the cost with the bulk slide attachment. The 16bit scanning
is giving me pics that print very well on my Canon iPF5000. Worth a
look.
Tom |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
Philip Homburg
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 04, 2007 8:48 pm Post subject: Re: Film scanner question |
|
|
In article <4662f972$0$30618$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>,
Barry Watzman <WatzmanNOSPAM@neo.rr.com> wrote:
| Quote: | What use(s) may be made of the images by me and my descendants over the
next century is not known at this time. The point is general purpose
conversion of an entire collection of photographs from film media to
electronic. Any reasonable future use should be supported.
|
You sort of have to make a choice between quick and dirty or perfect.
One option is to scan everything at a relatively low quality and then scan
some of the important images at a much higher quality. The downside is that
you have to keep the negatives around in case you need another high quality
scan. The advantage is that you can scan for a clear goal (for example,
presentation on a website).
Making perfect scans of every frame is very tricky. It requires a lot of
experience to be sure that you have perfect scans, it will take a lot time
getting all the scans. And it is possible that frames are simply not worth
scanning at that level of quality. After that, you have to make sure that
can keep the bits safe for ever. Of course, after you have done all that
you can just as well destroy the negatives.
For quick and dirty scans, you want something that works fast. For color
you want ICE.
For high quality scans, you first have to become and expert in scanning,
and then it will probably take a high quality scanner way to long for each
frame to get the perfect scan. So you have to be prepared to invest a lot of
time.
If the negatives are not particularly fragile, it is worth trying the quick and
dirty route first.
--
That was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it
could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done
by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make.
-- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chuck Tribolet
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2007 8:24 am Post subject: Re: Film scanner question |
|
|
Given that, there are a bunch of scanners that can scan each strip without intervention
and do a decent job.
But 6 megapiexels isn't much. Amd 16-bits PER COLOR is quite doable. I think you
are saying thatn 8 bits per color is OK. If you are scanning stuff to archive, I encourage
you to use as much resolution as possible in all dimensions.
"Barry Watzman" <WatzmanNOSPAM@neo.rr.com> wrote in message news:46618f76$0$4661$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
| Quote: | Unfortunately, the negatives are cut into strips of from two to six images each (mostly 4 and 5 images).
The desired result is about 6 megapixels, 24 bit (or greater) color depth.
Chuck Tribolet wrote:
What is the current state of the negatives (strips of 36, strips of 5 or 6,
something else)?
You REALLY want a scanner that will do however many negs are are
physically together without manual intervention.
What is your desired end result quality? Pixel dimensions? bit depth?
"Barry Watzman" <WatzmanNOSPAM@neo.rr.com> wrote in message news:4660e1ba$0$15002$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
I have a project that involves scanning a large number of 35mm negatives (high hundreds to perhaps as many as several thousand).
One of the things I'm considering is buying a film scanner. The plan would be to buy it, do the job, and resell it on E-Bay.
Effectively "renting" it for the difference between what I pay and what I get for it.
I looked at the Nikon 5000, but I'm put off by the price ($900 to $1,100).
To those of you who are knowledgeable about this subject, what about the Nikon LS-50? This is half the cost of the 5000. What
are the relative benefits and drawbacks?
Also, anyone know anything about "ScanCafe"? They apparently do scanning for 19 cents per slide, 4000 dpi, digital ICE and you
only have to actually buy the "good" images after looking at previews online. However, turnaround is 6 weeks.
[FWIW, Sam's Club does them for 18 cents, but the resolution is low (1800 x 1200, about 2 megapixels) and they don't have
digital ICE or any other enhancement ... it's a bare-bones straight scan. But the quality is not bad within those limitations
(although 2MP is a pretty severe limitation), the turnaround is fast (24 hours for 100 images) and the original media is never
more than an hour from my home).]
Comments welcome.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Barry Watzman
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2007 8:41 pm Post subject: Re: Film scanner question |
|
|
FWIW, for better or worse, I bought a Nikon LS-2000 on E-Bay (have not
yet received it). It's not the greatest, but I think it will be
adequate and it didn't cost $1,000 or even $500 (in total, with all the
accessories and shipping, it's going to end up being a bit under $200
.... these have gone for less, but this one has both transports and some
other accessories, and a guarantee that it's working).
I'll post back after I have it.
Anyone have any tips on the LS-2000? It's 2,700 dpi with digital ICE,
but it's not current "state of the art" by any means. I have downloaded
all of the drivers and documentation from the Nikon web site.
Philip Homburg wrote:
| Quote: | In article <4662f972$0$30618$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>,
Barry Watzman <WatzmanNOSPAM@neo.rr.com> wrote:
What use(s) may be made of the images by me and my descendants over the
next century is not known at this time. The point is general purpose
conversion of an entire collection of photographs from film media to
electronic. Any reasonable future use should be supported.
You sort of have to make a choice between quick and dirty or perfect.
One option is to scan everything at a relatively low quality and then scan
some of the important images at a much higher quality. The downside is that
you have to keep the negatives around in case you need another high quality
scan. The advantage is that you can scan for a clear goal (for example,
presentation on a website).
Making perfect scans of every frame is very tricky. It requires a lot of
experience to be sure that you have perfect scans, it will take a lot time
getting all the scans. And it is possible that frames are simply not worth
scanning at that level of quality. After that, you have to make sure that
can keep the bits safe for ever. Of course, after you have done all that
you can just as well destroy the negatives.
For quick and dirty scans, you want something that works fast. For color
you want ICE.
For high quality scans, you first have to become and expert in scanning,
and then it will probably take a high quality scanner way to long for each
frame to get the perfect scan. So you have to be prepared to invest a lot of
time.
If the negatives are not particularly fragile, it is worth trying the quick and
dirty route first.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Philip Homburg
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2007 10:04 pm Post subject: Re: Film scanner question |
|
|
In article <46658450$0$8997$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>,
Barry Watzman <WatzmanNOSPAM@neo.rr.com> wrote:
| Quote: | FWIW, for better or worse, I bought a Nikon LS-2000 on E-Bay (have not
yet received it). It's not the greatest, but I think it will be
adequate and it didn't cost $1,000 or even $500 (in total, with all the
accessories and shipping, it's going to end up being a bit under $200
... these have gone for less, but this one has both transports and some
other accessories, and a guarantee that it's working).
I'll post back after I have it.
Anyone have any tips on the LS-2000? It's 2,700 dpi with digital ICE,
but it's not current "state of the art" by any means. I have downloaded
all of the drivers and documentation from the Nikon web site.
|
Make sure that you check if it needs to be cleaned. Scan a slide with a
high contrast transition (from white to black), if the white sort of leaks
into the black you need to clean it. If it is a sharp transition in one or two
pixels, it is fine.
Scans from an LS-2000 should be good enough for 8x12" prints. With ICE, the
LS-2000 tends to be a bit soft, so you have to apply plenty of USM.
On some film, the resolution of the LS-2000 is low enough that you may
experience grain aliasing.
--
That was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it
could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done
by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make.
-- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fix your Windows Problems - FAST.
FREE Safe Scan Registry Check. Locate & Fix Errors in Minutes!
|
|
Alan Browne
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2007 10:46 pm Post subject: Re: Film scanner question |
|
|
Barry Watzman wrote:
| Quote: | Don't tell other people how to post.
|
*PLONK* |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Alan Browne
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2007 10:47 pm Post subject: Re: Film scanner question |
|
|
Happy Traveler wrote:
*PLONK* -top posting |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Barry Watzman
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2007 1:10 am Post subject: Re: Film scanner question |
|
|
Most of my shots were on ASA 200 print film, so I don't think grain will
be a problem.
If the unit needs cleaning, can I do this myself (I service and repair
PCs, including laptops, so I'm pretty good at taking things apart). Is
there a service manual for this anywhere that I could get hold of?
Philip Homburg wrote:
| Quote: | In article <46658450$0$8997$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>,
Barry Watzman <WatzmanNOSPAM@neo.rr.com> wrote:
FWIW, for better or worse, I bought a Nikon LS-2000 on E-Bay (have not
yet received it). It's not the greatest, but I think it will be
adequate and it didn't cost $1,000 or even $500 (in total, with all the
accessories and shipping, it's going to end up being a bit under $200
... these have gone for less, but this one has both transports and some
other accessories, and a guarantee that it's working).
I'll post back after I have it.
Anyone have any tips on the LS-2000? It's 2,700 dpi with digital ICE,
but it's not current "state of the art" by any means. I have downloaded
all of the drivers and documentation from the Nikon web site.
Make sure that you check if it needs to be cleaned. Scan a slide with a
high contrast transition (from white to black), if the white sort of leaks
into the black you need to clean it. If it is a sharp transition in one or two
pixels, it is fine.
Scans from an LS-2000 should be good enough for 8x12" prints. With ICE, the
LS-2000 tends to be a bit soft, so you have to apply plenty of USM.
On some film, the resolution of the LS-2000 is low enough that you may
experience grain aliasing.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Philip Homburg
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2007 3:39 am Post subject: Re: Film scanner question |
|
|
In article <4665c32f$0$15006$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>,
Barry Watzman <WatzmanNOSPAM@neo.rr.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Most of my shots were on ASA 200 print film, so I don't think grain will
be a problem.
|
Grain aliasing is hard to predict.
| Quote: | If the unit needs cleaning, can I do this myself (I service and repair
PCs, including laptops, so I'm pretty good at taking things apart). Is
there a service manual for this anywhere that I could get hold of?
|
Someone made a nice manual for cleaning an LS-2000. The original seems to
have disappeared, so I put a copy at
<http://misc.hq.phicoh.net/ls2000-cleaning/>
In my experience, sensor cleaning tools work quite well for cleaning
the mirror.
--
That was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it
could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done
by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make.
-- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Barry Watzman
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2007 6:34 am Post subject: Re: Film scanner question |
|
|
Thank you very much. I had found that earlier ... not sure if it was
from your site or another copy ... and I saved it as a "web archive
single file" (*.mht) file. That should be all that I need.
Philip Homburg wrote:
| Quote: | In article <4665c32f$0$15006$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>,
Barry Watzman <WatzmanNOSPAM@neo.rr.com> wrote:
Most of my shots were on ASA 200 print film, so I don't think grain will
be a problem.
Grain aliasing is hard to predict.
If the unit needs cleaning, can I do this myself (I service and repair
PCs, including laptops, so I'm pretty good at taking things apart). Is
there a service manual for this anywhere that I could get hold of?
Someone made a nice manual for cleaning an LS-2000. The original seems to
have disappeared, so I put a copy at
http://misc.hq.phicoh.net/ls2000-cleaning/
In my experience, sensor cleaning tools work quite well for cleaning
the mirror.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
David Blanchard
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 07, 2007 12:59 pm Post subject: Re: Film scanner question |
|
|
In article <46658450$0$8997$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>,
Barry Watzman <WatzmanNOSPAM@neo.rr.com> wrote:
| Quote: | FWIW, for better or worse, I bought a Nikon LS-2000 on E-Bay (have not
yet received it). It's not the greatest, but I think it will be
adequate and it didn't cost $1,000 or even $500 (in total, with all the
accessories and shipping, it's going to end up being a bit under $200
... these have gone for less, but this one has both transports and some
other accessories, and a guarantee that it's working).
I'll post back after I have it.
Anyone have any tips on the LS-2000? It's 2,700 dpi with digital ICE,
but it's not current "state of the art" by any means. I have downloaded
all of the drivers and documentation from the Nikon web site.
|
The LS-2000 is SCSI, of course, while most newer scanners are either
Firewire or USB.
I bought a Nikon LS-2000 when they were still new and paid nearly
$1500 for it. Now I own the Nikon 5000 ED and paid about $1000. The
5000 is vastly superior to the 2000. So much better, in fact, that I
am rescanning many of my slides (at 16 bpc, 4x sampling, occasionally
at 16x sampling, ICE on, ROC/GEM off).
I don't use the LS-2000 anymore...
As for advice, check the archives of this newsgroup. There has been
plenty of discussion on the Nikon CoolScan scanners, the NikonScan
software, etc. And be glad that you aren't trying to scan Kodachrome
slides!
-db- |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| |
Watched Topics
Search
Register
Log in to check your private messages
Profile
Log in
Memberlist
Usergroups