A big film scanner thread

I've um'ed and ah'ed overnight and today. The Plustek appears a little scruffy in the pics, many scratches on the exterior. Appears to have led a hard life for something only a couple of years old.


Thanks, I've never used Vuescan before and I'd want to be confident it works with that. I'm not even great with EpsonScan to be honest.

Anyway I've decided against the Plustek and am going to collect a minimal financial risk option (£20)- a Canoscan 5600F with the 35mm scanning holder. Yes, I'll need Vuescan with this but I'll just take out a years subscription and see if I want to pay for it as a one next year.

Thanks for the advice everyone.
I found epson scan 3 to be very simple, and it has to be for me.

put it in pro mode
select negs in frame
choose tiff and resolution
Click preview

Those few simple operations get you to a position where you can adjust B&W points for each image and full scan it or scan them all at once

And its free. Designed to work with their scanners.


I found editing in Darktable negadoctor to give better results than Lightroom for the Tiffs
 
Last edited:
So the £20 Canon 5600f works plus I'm impressed with how easy to use Vuescan is (free trial only currently).

Sample scans at 1200dpi, nothing else adjusted on them, resolution unadjusted for display here. HP5 I developed in ID-11 yesterday. Pics taken on an EOS 1000fn. First would have been on slow-ish shutter speed (1/30?) and probably f4. Second was on auto.

21204.jpg

21205.jpg

Now to me they seem to have a lot "noise" to me. Can anyone else see that? I've rescanned them at 2400 & 4800 dpi and there is no improvement. The scanner was given a good clean especially the top of the glass. I've viewed the negs on the light table with a 10x loupe and the negs look "clean".

Any ideas what the issue is? Is it worth cleaning the underside of the glass?

After I've cooked dinner I'll scan some lab dev negs to rule out whether it's my deving skills or not. Low res scans (files size approx 500kb) on my V500 are a lot more detailed and less noisy than from this Canon.
 
Last edited:
So the £20 Canon 5600f works plus I'm impressed with how easy to use Vuescan is (free trial only currently).

Sample scans at 1200dpi, nothing else adjusted on them, resolution unadjusted for display here. HP5 I developed in ID-11 yesterday. Pics taken on an EOS 1000fn. First would have been on slow-ish shutter speed (1/30?) and probably f4. Second was on auto.

View attachment 482827

View attachment 482828

Now to me they seem to have a lot "noise" to me. Can anyone else see that? I've rescanned them at 2400 & 4800 dpi and there is no improvement. The scanner was given a good clean especially the top of the glass. I've viewed the negs on the light table with a 10x loupe and the negs look "clean".

Any ideas what the issue is? Is it worth cleaning the underside of the glass?

After I've cooked dinner I'll scan some lab dev negs to rule out whether it's my deving skills or not. Low res scans (files size approx 500kb) on my V500 are a lot more detailed and less noisy than from this Canon.
Well the optics on the epson is probably better than the canon?
 
So the £20 Canon 5600f works plus I'm impressed with how easy to use Vuescan is (free trial only currently).

Sample scans at 1200dpi, nothing else adjusted on them, resolution unadjusted for display here. HP5 I developed in ID-11 yesterday. Pics taken on an EOS 1000fn. First would have been on slow-ish shutter speed (1/30?) and probably f4. Second was on auto.

View attachment 482827

View attachment 482828

Now to me they seem to have a lot "noise" to me. Can anyone else see that? I've rescanned them at 2400 & 4800 dpi and there is no improvement. The scanner was given a good clean especially the top of the glass. I've viewed the negs on the light table with a 10x loupe and the negs look "clean".

Any ideas what the issue is? Is it worth cleaning the underside of the glass?

After I've cooked dinner I'll scan some lab dev negs to rule out whether it's my deving skills or not. Low res scans (files size approx 500kb) on my V500 are a lot more detailed and less noisy than from this Canon.

could it be that the evaluation version does not have full functionality ?
 
It used to be the case that the functionality was the same.

May I recommend thst you scan at maximum resolution saving the raw file (I know that this isn't always optimal) and then use this with different settings. I have found that changing the film between scans of consecutive negatives can give better results.
 
Back
Top