I have all my families slides and want to scan them to put onto cd/dvd for the rest of my family. Which scanner would be best? I have also seen a Hammacher Schlemmer slide converter. I have a lot of slides and that is why I will be attemptiing this project on my own.
On May 5, 9:05 pm, ellebelly <ellebelly.390...@no.email.invalid>
wrote:
> I have all my families slides and want to scan them to put onto cd/dvd
> for the rest of my family. Which scanner would be best? I have also
> seen a Hammacher Schlemmer slide converter. I have a lot of slides and
> that is why I will be attemptiing this project on my own.
>
> ellebelly
I think the V700 is a step above the 4990 or the 4490, for my pro work
the V700 has been great. Is it worth the $3-400 difference between the
V700 and the 4490 for family pictures is up to you. The HS slide
converter doesn't look like a quality product to me. If you are doing
a major scanning project have a good book to read. One very nice thing
about the V700 is that it takes 12 slides at a time, you can adjust
each slide separately, and just let it scan. At 3200ppi 12 slides will
take about 1/2 hour without Digital Ice or 1 hr with Digital Ice.
Actually, I'd recommend a Nikon film scanner rather than a flatbed
scanner. Models to consider would be LS-30, LS-40, LS-2000, LS-4000.
Be sure that you get one that has been cleaned and serviced. But no
matter how you do this, it's tremendously time consuming, might take
hundreds of hours if you have thousands of images.
ellebelly wrote:
> I have all my families slides and want to scan them to put onto cd/dvd
> for the rest of my family. Which scanner would be best? I have also
> seen a Hammacher Schlemmer slide converter. I have a lot of slides and
> that is why I will be attemptiing this project on my own.
>
> ellebelly
>
>
I agree with Tom. I have the V750 and have scanned about 3000 slides at
600dpi. That's not the best, but I just wanted to see what I had. Plus it's
perfect for those digital frames.
I tried 2400dpi and 1200dpi and it took too long. At 600dpi I'm able to do a
36 exposure roll in about 20 minutes or so. If you have thousands of slides,
like I do, then it'll take a while. I spent about 15 days to do the ones I
did and that's with dedication to the project and at least 1 - 3 rolls of
film done a day.
Good luck!
"tomm42" <tmonego@wildblue.net> wrote in message
news:1b7abf7b-4aea-43a6-ae10-eed5d92d87b4@p25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> On May 5, 9:05 pm, ellebelly <ellebelly.390...@no.email.invalid>
> wrote:
>> I have all my families slides and want to scan them to put onto cd/dvd
>> for the rest of my family. Which scanner would be best? I have also
>> seen a Hammacher Schlemmer slide converter. I have a lot of slides and
>> that is why I will be attemptiing this project on my own.
>>
>> ellebelly
>
>
> I think the V700 is a step above the 4990 or the 4490, for my pro work
> the V700 has been great. Is it worth the $3-400 difference between the
> V700 and the 4490 for family pictures is up to you. The HS slide
> converter doesn't look like a quality product to me. If you are doing
> a major scanning project have a good book to read. One very nice thing
> about the V700 is that it takes 12 slides at a time, you can adjust
> each slide separately, and just let it scan. At 3200ppi 12 slides will
> take about 1/2 hour without Digital Ice or 1 hr with Digital Ice.
>
> Tom
One other note, I just checked, I did 3,595 slides and it took up 2.7Gigs of
space. I'll admit that there are some slides that are higher resolution than
600dpi in there.
Anyway, the alternative for scanning all the slides myself was sending it
somewhere else to have done. One place charges $1189.95 for 2100 slides.
Granted they also give you a DVD and it's 2000dpi straight off the bat, but
$1189.95 will pay for a Nikon 5000 scanner and almost the 50-slide feeder
that you can sell when you're done with the project. However, the drawback
to doing it yourself is time. So, do you want to pay for someone else to do
the work or do you want to go down memory lane and do it yourself? I chose
to do it myself and I'm glad I did.
"huh?" <huh@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:LHqUj.13615$GE1.622@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com...
>I agree with Tom. I have the V750 and have scanned about 3000 slides at
>600dpi. That's not the best, but I just wanted to see what I had. Plus it's
>perfect for those digital frames.
>
> I tried 2400dpi and 1200dpi and it took too long. At 600dpi I'm able to do
> a 36 exposure roll in about 20 minutes or so. If you have thousands of
> slides, like I do, then it'll take a while. I spent about 15 days to do
> the ones I did and that's with dedication to the project and at least 1 -
> 3 rolls of film done a day.
>
> Good luck!
>
> "tomm42" <tmonego@wildblue.net> wrote in message
> news:1b7abf7b-4aea-43a6-ae10-eed5d92d87b4@p25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>> On May 5, 9:05 pm, ellebelly <ellebelly.390...@no.email.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>> I have all my families slides and want to scan them to put onto cd/dvd
>>> for the rest of my family. Which scanner would be best? I have also
>>> seen a Hammacher Schlemmer slide converter. I have a lot of slides and
>>> that is why I will be attemptiing this project on my own.
>>>
>>> ellebelly
>>
>>
>> I think the V700 is a step above the 4990 or the 4490, for my pro work
>> the V700 has been great. Is it worth the $3-400 difference between the
>> V700 and the 4490 for family pictures is up to you. The HS slide
>> converter doesn't look like a quality product to me. If you are doing
>> a major scanning project have a good book to read. One very nice thing
>> about the V700 is that it takes 12 slides at a time, you can adjust
>> each slide separately, and just let it scan. At 3200ppi 12 slides will
>> take about 1/2 hour without Digital Ice or 1 hr with Digital Ice.
>>
>> Tom
>
>
An LS-2000 is 2,700 dpi, which is just about ideal ... it gives a 10
megapixel image. The LS-4000 and 5000 are 4,000 dpi, which in my view
is actually worse ... it's 22 megapixels, which in fact means that the
files are MUCH larger and it takes a lot longer to do the scanning, and
for most images (most cameras, most films, most photographers, most
exposures) there just isn't anything of serious interest that 10MP won't
capture (even at 10MP, you will see film grain). On the other hand, if
you have a 4,000 dpi scanner and you want to use a lower resolution, you
either drop down to 2000 dpi (every other pixel), which is NOT as good
as 2,700 (it's only about 5.5 megapixels), or you get "interpolated"
pixels. So, really, 2,700 works very well. In fact I think it's about
optimum.
huh? wrote:
> One other note, I just checked, I did 3,595 slides and it took up 2.7Gigs of
> space. I'll admit that there are some slides that are higher resolution than
> 600dpi in there.
>
> Anyway, the alternative for scanning all the slides myself was sending it
> somewhere else to have done. One place charges $1189.95 for 2100 slides.
> Granted they also give you a DVD and it's 2000dpi straight off the bat, but
> $1189.95 will pay for a Nikon 5000 scanner and almost the 50-slide feeder
> that you can sell when you're done with the project. However, the drawback
> to doing it yourself is time. So, do you want to pay for someone else to do
> the work or do you want to go down memory lane and do it yourself? I chose
> to do it myself and I'm glad I did.
>
> "huh?" <huh@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:LHqUj.13615$GE1.622@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com...
>> I agree with Tom. I have the V750 and have scanned about 3000 slides at
>> 600dpi. That's not the best, but I just wanted to see what I had. Plus it's
>> perfect for those digital frames.
>>
>> I tried 2400dpi and 1200dpi and it took too long. At 600dpi I'm able to do
>> a 36 exposure roll in about 20 minutes or so. If you have thousands of
>> slides, like I do, then it'll take a while. I spent about 15 days to do
>> the ones I did and that's with dedication to the project and at least 1 -
>> 3 rolls of film done a day.
>>
>> Good luck!
>>
>> "tomm42" <tmonego@wildblue.net> wrote in message
>> news:1b7abf7b-4aea-43a6-ae10-eed5d92d87b4@p25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>>> On May 5, 9:05 pm, ellebelly <ellebelly.390...@no.email.invalid>
>>> wrote:
>>>> I have all my families slides and want to scan them to put onto cd/dvd
>>>> for the rest of my family. Which scanner would be best? I have also
>>>> seen a Hammacher Schlemmer slide converter. I have a lot of slides and
>>>> that is why I will be attemptiing this project on my own.
>>>>
>>>> ellebelly
>>>
>>> I think the V700 is a step above the 4990 or the 4490, for my pro work
>>> the V700 has been great. Is it worth the $3-400 difference between the
>>> V700 and the 4490 for family pictures is up to you. The HS slide
>>> converter doesn't look like a quality product to me. If you are doing
>>> a major scanning project have a good book to read. One very nice thing
>>> about the V700 is that it takes 12 slides at a time, you can adjust
>>> each slide separately, and just let it scan. At 3200ppi 12 slides will
>>> take about 1/2 hour without Digital Ice or 1 hr with Digital Ice.
>>>
>>> Tom
>>
>
>
After buying the V700 and doing comparisons with a recently
refurbished LS2000 the V700 had the same sharpness as the LS2000 and
more dynamic range especially in the shadows. Many of my images are
retinas of eyes and I need a scanner that can handle dark sections in
an image. So my Ls2000 sits on a shelf.
With the V700 I have scanned all formats it can handle but 35mm is the
most applicable here. I really don't see much improvement with the
image over 3200ppi certainly nothing over 4800ppi. Yes it is slow but
at 3200ppi it is faster than the Nikon at 2700ppi by a little bit. I
do a lot of scanning at 1200ppi for PowerPoint and the 3200ppi are a
big improvement in detail, as it should be. So if I am publishing or
printing an image I generally scan at the highest res necessary for
the final image,again no more than 4000ppi because of extra time and
lack of extra detail.
Hope this helps
Tom
On May 7, 11:03 pm, Barry Watzman <WatzmanNOS...@neo.rr.com> wrote:
> An LS-2000 is 2,700 dpi, which is just about ideal ... it gives a 10
> megapixel image. The LS-4000 and 5000 are 4,000 dpi, which in my view
> is actually worse ... it's 22 megapixels, which in fact means that the
> files are MUCH larger and it takes a lot longer to do the scanning, and
> for most images (most cameras, most films, most photographers, most
> exposures) there just isn't anything of serious interest that 10MP won't
> capture (even at 10MP, you will see film grain). On the other hand, if
> you have a 4,000 dpi scanner and you want to use a lower resolution, you
> either drop down to 2000 dpi (every other pixel), which is NOT as good
> as 2,700 (it's only about 5.5 megapixels), or you get "interpolated"
> pixels. So, really, 2,700 works very well. In fact I think it's about
> optimum.
>
> huh? wrote:
> > One other note, I just checked, I did 3,595 slides and it took up 2.7Gigs of
> > space. I'll admit that there are some slides that are higher resolution than
> > 600dpi in there.
>
> > Anyway, the alternative for scanning all the slides myself was sending it
> > somewhere else to have done. One place charges $1189.95 for 2100 slides.
> > Granted they also give you a DVD and it's 2000dpi straight off the bat, but
> > $1189.95 will pay for a Nikon 5000 scanner and almost the 50-slide feeder
> > that you can sell when you're done with the project. However, the drawback
> > to doing it yourself is time. So, do you want to pay for someone else to do
> > the work or do you want to go down memory lane and do it yourself? I chose
> > to do it myself and I'm glad I did.
>
> > "huh?" <h...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >news:LHqUj.13615$GE1.622@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com.. .
> >> I agree with Tom. I have the V750 and have scanned about 3000 slides at
> >> 600dpi. That's not the best, but I just wanted to see what I had. Plus it's
> >> perfect for those digital frames.
>
> >> I tried 2400dpi and 1200dpi and it took too long. At 600dpi I'm able to do
> >> a 36 exposure roll in about 20 minutes or so. If you have thousands of
> >> slides, like I do, then it'll take a while. I spent about 15 days to do
> >> the ones I did and that's with dedication to the project and at least 1 -
> >> 3 rolls of film done a day.
>
> >> Good luck!
>
> >> "tomm42" <tmon...@wildblue.net> wrote in message
> >>news:1b7abf7b-4aea-43a6-ae10-eed5d92d87b4@p25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> >>> On May 5, 9:05 pm, ellebelly <ellebelly.390...@no.email.invalid>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>> I have all my families slides and want to scan them to put onto cd/dvd
> >>>> for the rest of my family. Which scanner would be best? I have also
> >>>> seen a Hammacher Schlemmer slide converter. I have a lot of slides and
> >>>> that is why I will be attemptiing this project on my own.
>
> >>>> ellebelly
>
> >>> I think the V700 is a step above the 4990 or the 4490, for my pro work
> >>> the V700 has been great. Is it worth the $3-400 difference between the
> >>> V700 and the 4490 for family pictures is up to you. The HS slide
> >>> converter doesn't look like a quality product to me. If you are doing
> >>> a major scanning project have a good book to read. One very nice thing
> >>> about the V700 is that it takes 12 slides at a time, you can adjust
> >>> each slide separately, and just let it scan. At 3200ppi 12 slides will
> >>> take about 1/2 hour without Digital Ice or 1 hr with Digital Ice.
>
> >>> Tom
ellebelly wrote:
> I have all my families slides and want to scan them to put onto cd/dvd
> for the rest of my family. Which scanner would be best? I have also
> seen a Hammacher Schlemmer slide converter. I have a lot of slides and
> that is why I will be attemptiing this project on my own.
Whatever you pick, I strongly suggest that step number one be to select
the slides that are worth scanning as a first step. Project them and if
they aren't:
-well exposed
-well composed
-beautiful, interesting, useful or important
-telling the family story
strangely enough I found very similar results to yours when testing an
Epson against the LS-20 I have (which btw is sharper than my mates LS-30)
the LS-40 on the other hand has excellent ICE operation so that makes it worth
it for me (though I have the Epson for 4x5)
my Nikon LS-20 now sits on a shelf
In article
<8e97616d-cae5-4c71-9ee0-b372257ca4b6@i76g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, tomm42
<tmonego@wildblue.net> wrote:
>After buying the V700 and doing comparisons with a recently
>refurbished LS2000 the V700 had the same sharpness as the LS2000 and
>more dynamic range especially in the shadows. Many of my images are
>retinas of eyes and I need a scanner that can handle dark sections in
>an image. So my Ls2000 sits on a shelf.
>With the V700 I have scanned all formats it can handle but 35mm is the
>most applicable here. I really don't see much improvement with the
>image over 3200ppi certainly nothing over 4800ppi. Yes it is slow but
>at 3200ppi it is faster than the Nikon at 2700ppi by a little bit. I
>do a lot of scanning at 1200ppi for PowerPoint and the 3200ppi are a
>big improvement in detail, as it should be. So if I am publishing or
>printing an image I generally scan at the highest res necessary for
>the final image,again no more than 4000ppi because of extra time and
>lack of extra detail.
>Hope this helps
>
>Tom
>
>
>On May 7, 11:03 pm, Barry Watzman <WatzmanNOS...@neo.rr.com> wrote:
>> An LS-2000 is 2,700 dpi, which is just about ideal ... it gives a 10
>> megapixel image. The LS-4000 and 5000 are 4,000 dpi, which in my view
>> is actually worse ... it's 22 megapixels, which in fact means that the
>> files are MUCH larger and it takes a lot longer to do the scanning, and
>> for most images (most cameras, most films, most photographers, most
>> exposures) there just isn't anything of serious interest that 10MP won't
>> capture (even at 10MP, you will see film grain). On the other hand, if
>> you have a 4,000 dpi scanner and you want to use a lower resolution, you
>> either drop down to 2000 dpi (every other pixel), which is NOT as good
>> as 2,700 (it's only about 5.5 megapixels), or you get "interpolated"
>> pixels. So, really, 2,700 works very well. In fact I think it's about
>> optimum.
>>
>> huh? wrote:
>> > One other note, I just checked, I did 3,595 slides and it took up 2.7Gigs
> of
>> > space. I'll admit that there are some slides that are higher resolution
> than
>> > 600dpi in there.
>>
>> > Anyway, the alternative for scanning all the slides myself was sending it
>> > somewhere else to have done. One place charges $1189.95 for 2100 slides.
>> > Granted they also give you a DVD and it's 2000dpi straight off the bat, but
>> > $1189.95 will pay for a Nikon 5000 scanner and almost the 50-slide feeder
>> > that you can sell when you're done with the project. However, the drawback
>> > to doing it yourself is time. So, do you want to pay for someone else to do
>> > the work or do you want to go down memory lane and do it yourself? I chose
>> > to do it myself and I'm glad I did.
>>
>> > "huh?" <h...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> >news:LHqUj.13615$GE1.622@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com.. .
>> >> I agree with Tom. I have the V750 and have scanned about 3000 slides at
>> >> 600dpi. That's not the best, but I just wanted to see what I had. Plus
> it's
>> >> perfect for those digital frames.
>>
>> >> I tried 2400dpi and 1200dpi and it took too long. At 600dpi I'm able to do
>> >> a 36 exposure roll in about 20 minutes or so. If you have thousands of
>> >> slides, like I do, then it'll take a while. I spent about 15 days to do
>> >> the ones I did and that's with dedication to the project and at least 1 -
>> >> 3 rolls of film done a day.
>>
>> >> Good luck!
>>
>> >> "tomm42" <tmon...@wildblue.net> wrote in message
>> >>news:1b7abf7b-4aea-43a6-ae10-eed5d92d87b4@p25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>> >>> On May 5, 9:05 pm, ellebelly <ellebelly.390...@no.email.invalid>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>> I have all my families slides and want to scan them to put onto cd/dvd
>> >>>> for the rest of my family. Which scanner would be best? I have also
>> >>>> seen a Hammacher Schlemmer slide converter. I have a lot of slides and
>> >>>> that is why I will be attemptiing this project on my own.
>>
>> >>>> ellebelly
>>
>> >>> I think the V700 is a step above the 4990 or the 4490, for my pro work
>> >>> the V700 has been great. Is it worth the $3-400 difference between the
>> >>> V700 and the 4490 for family pictures is up to you. The HS slide
>> >>> converter doesn't look like a quality product to me. If you are doing
>> >>> a major scanning project have a good book to read. One very nice thing
>> >>> about the V700 is that it takes 12 slides at a time, you can adjust
>> >>> each slide separately, and just let it scan. At 3200ppi 12 slides will
>> >>> take about 1/2 hour without Digital Ice or 1 hr with Digital Ice.
>>
>> >>> Tom
>
Epson 44900 amd V700 
Linear Mode
