Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Rangefinder Forum > Image Processing: Darkroom / Lightroom / Film > Scanners / Scanner Software

View Poll Results: How do you scan your 35mm B&W film?
I use a flatbed scanner - i.e. Epson V750 photo scanner 274 35.35%
I use a dedicated 35mm scanner - i.e. a Nikon Coolscan V 324 41.81%
I use a dedicated multi-format film scanner - i.e. a Nikon Coolscan 9000 77 9.94%
I use a professional scanner - i.e. drum scanner 25 3.23%
I send mine away to be scanned 48 6.19%
I don't care - I wet print! 27 3.48%
Voters: 775. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Old 03-20-2014   #81
dshfoto
Registered User
 
dshfoto's Avatar
 
dshfoto is offline
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: NYC
Posts: 365
My write up on a test of various techniques is at the following link

http://harrisfoto.com/Digital_Test/T...s_Write_up.pdf

the write up includes a link to some comparison jpgs
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-20-2014   #82
Skulls Road
Registered User
 
Skulls Road is offline
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by maxwell1295 View Post
Pakon F135 + dedicate XP laptop...this is easily the best purchase I've made for 35mm film, including any of the cameras I've bought.
Is the main advantage the speed or does it really scan better than a flatbed?

*edit* Just read a nice write-up on Film Wasters. Cool piece of kit!
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-20-2014   #83
Sid836
Registered User
 
Sid836 is offline
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,132
There should be an option like making a copy with a DSLR camera. This is how I scan them.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-23-2014   #84
newtorf
Registered User
 
newtorf is offline
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 121
Nikon 5000ED with self modified SA-21 holder to scan a whole roll at once.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-23-2014   #85
[email protected]
Registered User
 
raytoei@gmail.com's Avatar
 
[email protected] is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,005
i used a variety of scanners. only the v700 is a "current" scanner. the rest are old, out of warranty scanners bought from ebay. basically i have the minolta 3200 scanner if I want a high res image, i also have the pakon 135+ scanner which is only 6mp but scans an uncut whole roll under 4mins.
__________________
------------------------------------
Film is Photography.
------------------------------------
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-23-2014   #86
Ronny
Registered User
 
Ronny is offline
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Sweden
Posts: 344
DSLR with Macro.
__________________
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ronnypersson/[/size]
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-23-2014   #87
furbs
Registered User
 
furbs's Avatar
 
furbs is offline
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Virginia
Posts: 523
I use a V700 for 35mm and 120. Quality is good enough for online viewing, but I'll look into the glass film carriers if I want to get into printing in the future. Especially with 35mm film, the V700 with default film holder doesn't focus closely enough to capture film grain.
__________________
anthony flickr

found a chair beside a window
found a place where i belong
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-14-2014   #88
Bill Clark
Registered User
 
Bill Clark's Avatar
 
Bill Clark is offline
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Minnetonka, Minnesota
Age: 69
Posts: 1,952
I've passed on scanning film.

Years ago I had a lab that would scan for me and put the photographs on a web site. Now the only digital photographs I have are made with digital cameras.

Film stays as analog workflow and processed in my new darkroom!
__________________
I use my real name. How about you?
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-15-2014   #89
jzagaja
My website www.horns.pl
 
jzagaja is offline
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 291
Drum scanner (Scanmate 11000), RAW scan (Agfa Copex Rapid) and self made Photoshop plugin for negatives inversion (maintains film character):


https://www.flickr.com/photos/661090...14974/sizes/l/

V700 is pretty good too.
__________________
Jack

www.horns.pl
www.horns-diy.pl
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-15-2014   #90
Bille
Registered User
 
Bille's Avatar
 
Bille is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Age: 39
Posts: 662
Quote:
Originally Posted by jzagaja View Post
Drum scanner (Scanmate 11000)
Impressive machine...
http://thelabworks.com/wp-content/up...8/scanning.jpg
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-15-2014   #91
jzagaja
My website www.horns.pl
 
jzagaja is offline
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 291
Yes it's like small CNC lathe with micron precision ) AD converters are good but a bit outdated now. In comparison with 700kg drum scanners really good design. True analogue pictures. Please note it's mid 90s design
__________________
Jack

www.horns.pl
www.horns-diy.pl
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-19-2014   #92
okcomputer
Registered User
 
okcomputer is offline
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 50
Sony A7R + Olympus Marco Bellow with film holder attachment. Once you're focused using live view to be "grain sharp", it's about 5 seconds per frame to "scan".




__________________
http://monochromal.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-21-2014   #93
conyon
Registered User
 
conyon is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 242
I'm experimenting with 'camera scan'; I've tried, so far, a Ricoh GXR with the A12 50mm macro... -- martin
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-05-2014   #94
cmc850
Registered User
 
cmc850 is offline
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 67
using a PrimeFilm (Reflecta) 7200 and VueScan - only issue is that for conventional bw films like the below, TMAX100, there's enough dust to drive me crazy. I need to work on my darkroom technique to keep the negs cleaner, I guess - was never an issue back when printing on an enlarger, diffusion or condenser. Happy enough with tonality and sharpness.

  Reply With Quote

Old 05-08-2014   #95
Chris101
summicronia
 
Chris101's Avatar
 
Chris101 is offline
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Arizona
Posts: 4,287
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmc850 View Post
using a PrimeFilm (Reflecta) 7200 and VueScan - only issue is that for conventional bw films like the below, TMAX100, there's enough dust to drive me crazy. I need to work on my darkroom technique to keep the negs cleaner, I guess - was never an issue back when printing on an enlarger, diffusion or condenser. Happy enough with tonality and sharpness.
The scan is great, but I haven't seen a Karmann-Ghia for decades! Man, do I miss that car. Back in the 60s we called it a sports car.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-08-2014   #96
gnuyork
Registered User
 
gnuyork is offline
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Marietta, GA
Posts: 503
Minolta 5400. Excellent scanner.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-12-2014   #97
edge100
Registered User
 
edge100 is offline
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 625
Pakon F135+
__________________
Former street photographer
The Definitive Guide to Scanning Film with a Digital Camera
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-12-2014   #98
ray*j*gun
Registered User
 
ray*j*gun's Avatar
 
ray*j*gun is offline
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Philadelphia area
Posts: 2,317
Epson V500 works very well ....... don't do that much since I have a wet darkroom.
__________________
Raymond
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-12-2014   #99
cipe
Registered User
 
cipe is offline
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 22
I use a Pakon F-135 Plus
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-12-2014   #100
Bruno Gracia
Registered User
 
Bruno Gracia's Avatar
 
Bruno Gracia is offline
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Ronda (Spain)
Age: 32
Posts: 731
Pakon 135 Plus
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-12-2014   #101
mrred
Registered User
 
mrred is offline
Join Date: Jan 2011
Age: 55
Posts: 4
I use a V700 with my own DIY fluid mount jig. I have a pre-fab jig, but it is more of a hastle to use and I have yet to get it into perfect focus.

The software is vuescan.

ORWO N74+, Thornton Stand 5/5, I forget the camera



The DIY rig sitting on my (then) 4490. It cost me under $10, not including the scan fluid. I made it in 2010 and I use it to this very day.



My blog article on it....

http://myfilmstuff.blogspot.ca/2010/04/5-wet-mount.html
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-12-2014   #102
Charles S
Registered User
 
Charles S is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: switzerland
Posts: 86
+1 For the Pakon
__________________
www.charles-s.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-12-2014   #103
MiniMoke
Registered User
 
MiniMoke is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Luxembourg
Age: 54
Posts: 457
I got a Nikon Coolscan IV from an RFF member to replace my Epson V600 and the change in quality and resolution in enormous, though the Coolscan sports only 2900 dpi.... less than the Epson.

I do not need to sharpen in post anymore, well mostly, and get VERY good color results from slides and negative film without any hassle. Before, the Epson produced very often weird color casts on the scans, with Epson Scan, Silverfast and VueScan.

With the automatic film feeder, the scanner is reasonably fast..... well, it takes still more time to scan a couple of rolls than the Epson, but the quality is well worth it.
__________________
Meet me at www.whyfilmcameras.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-12-2014   #104
gilgsn
Registered User
 
gilgsn's Avatar
 
gilgsn is offline
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Sarasota Florida
Age: 50
Posts: 192
Hello,

I just got a Pacific Image 120 yesterday. Upon taking it out of the box I heard a noise inside... Shook it a bit and a screw fell off. I scanned a few 6x7 negatives and the front door fell off! I assume that's where the screw should have been... So, shoddy quality control for sure. It doesn't feel very solid either, not $1300 solid anyway...

Image quality however is a noticeable improvement from the Epson V500.



I could have cleaned it up better, but you get the idea... HP5+, with Pentax 6x7, 105/2.5.

So I am not going to send it back, too long to wait. It does work, just that stupid door missing now. I put a piece of masking tape on the slot when not in use.

What I like is that on 3200dpi the scanner produces an image that has a 3000dpi resolution. There is no need to scan at higher resolution and reduce the image via software.

Gil.
__________________
Lumix GM5.
I dearly miss my M2!
http://www.flickr.com/photos/gilgsn/
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-12-2014   #105
rolfe
Registered User
 
rolfe's Avatar
 
rolfe is offline
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Egremont, MA
Posts: 312
You guys doing mainly 35mm should get a Pakon and not look back...they're only $250.00! Add a V700 if you're doing medium format and that is the cheapest scanning solution you will find that does quality work.
__________________
My Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-12-2014   #106
curmudgeon
Registered User
 
curmudgeon's Avatar
 
curmudgeon is offline
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Jersey Shore
Posts: 46
I use a V700 for MF scans but I've never been really happy with it for 35mm scans. I recently bought a Plustek 8100. It gives me better 35mm scans but it's annoyingly slow for scanning quantities of frames. My solution, which I just started this week, is to use the V700 to scan the entire roll as an 8x10 transparency, print an 8-1/2x11 B&W "contact sheet" just like I did in my darkroom days, and then use 8100 to scan just the frames I plan to work with. I'd forgotten how much useful information is provided by a contact sheet.
__________________
--Doug
Leica IIIf, Leica IIIg, Nikon F and an iPhone 6+
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-13-2014   #107
JPSuisse
Registered User
 
JPSuisse's Avatar
 
JPSuisse is offline
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 418
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonmanjiro View Post
Coolscan 5000 with SA-30 so I can scan an entire roll in one go.

@ Jon : Such pictures of such mundane things can be really useful! Thanks for the idea. :-)

Otherwise, I am surprised how many people really get satisfactory results now using digital cameras to *scan*.

Keep the comments coming everybody!
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-14-2014   #108
maxwell1295
Registered User
 
maxwell1295's Avatar
 
maxwell1295 is offline
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 532
Quote:
Originally Posted by rolfe View Post
You guys doing mainly 35mm should get a Pakon and not look back...they're only $250.00! Add a V700 if you're doing medium format and that is the cheapest scanning solution you will find that does quality work.
This is EXACTLY what I'm doing. Worked out pretty well for me. The Pakon is a godsend...
__________________
Canon EOS 1n, Fuji GA645, Pentax 6x7, Olympus OM-1, Polaroid 360, Rollei 35

My Website
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-14-2014   #109
mrred
Registered User
 
mrred is offline
Join Date: Jan 2011
Age: 55
Posts: 4
How many bit colour are the scans?
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-14-2014   #110
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
 
semilog's Avatar
 
semilog is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,682
Since my old Mikrotek/Polaroid 4000 bit the dust, I've been scanning with the Epson V500. The resolution is not tremendous, but it's fast and I've learned to extract adequate tonality from it. This is 35mm ACROS.



A bigger version is here.
__________________
There are two kinds of photographers:
those who are interested in what a particular camera can't do,
and those who are interested in what it can do.

semilog.smugmug.com | flickr.com/photos/semilog/
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-14-2014   #111
A Y
Registered User
 
A Y is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 29
The Pakon has 8-bit color. It's good, but sometimes its non-adjustable auto-exposure gets in the way if you purposely shoot low-key or high-key, and it tries to compensate for it.

I go between that and a DSLR digitizer, which can be very high quality, but is much slower, especially for large negatives.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-14-2014   #112
B.Toews
Registered User
 
B.Toews's Avatar
 
B.Toews is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Ontario, Canada
Age: 23
Posts: 569
I'm currently only shooting 35mm, which I "scan" with my Canon 5D or 7D and a Sigma 150mm macro lens. It only takes about 10 minutes per roll, and I'm happy with the quality.
__________________
Blog | Flickr | Instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-14-2014   #113
Merlijn53
Registered User
 
Merlijn53 is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by B.Toews View Post
I'm currently only shooting 35mm, which I "scan" with my Canon 5D or 7D and a Sigma 150mm macro lens. It only takes about 10 minutes per roll, and I'm happy with the quality.
What's the use of photographing on film if you take this route. Isn't it easier (better)? to use your digital camera to take the picture? Or do you also make "wet" prints?
Frank
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-14-2014   #114
Sid836
Registered User
 
Sid836 is offline
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,132
Well, to show these photos to your buddies that are far away, you need to scan them in some way. You cannot send the negatives, nor print them and mail them.
It all remains the same though. Also, manipulating your scans on the computer is a cheap way of making an easy preview of what and how to print on paper. I like to scan them first, try different contrast values, different crops and then I decide on what paper to print, how to crop. It saves me a lot in the darkroom especially when deciding to use some expensive papers.
Btw, me too scan the film with a Nikon D90 and a Micro 40mm lens.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-14-2014   #115
Merlijn53
Registered User
 
Merlijn53 is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nikos72 View Post
Well, to show these photos to your buddies that are far away, you need to scan them in some way. You cannot send the negatives, nor print them and mail them.
It all remains the same though. Also, manipulating your scans on the computer is a cheap way of making an easy preview of what and how to print on paper. I like to scan them first, try different contrast values, different crops and then I decide on what paper to print, how to crop. It saves me a lot in the darkroom especially when deciding to use some expensive papers.
Btw, me too scan the film with a Nikon D90 and a Micro 40mm lens.
Well, that makes sense. Maybe I was just thinking a bit narrowminded. Since I have no darkroom at the moment, for me scanning is the only way. I use an Epson v700 for archiving my negatives, like contactsheets and an Imacon for the real work.
Frank
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-15-2014   #116
edge100
Registered User
 
edge100 is offline
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 625
Quote:
Originally Posted by Merlijn53 View Post
What's the use of photographing on film if you take this route. Isn't it easier (better)? to use your digital camera to take the picture? Or do you also make "wet" prints?
Frank
Huh? You don't really lose any of the benefits of film by digitizing it, whether or not you use a scanner or a DSLR to do so.
__________________
Former street photographer
The Definitive Guide to Scanning Film with a Digital Camera
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-15-2014   #117
Merlijn53
Registered User
 
Merlijn53 is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by edge100 View Post
Huh? You don't really lose any of the benefits of film by digitizing it, whether or not you use a scanner or a DSLR to do so.
Well, maybe it's just me, but photographing on film and than photograping this film with your digital camera looks a bit funny to me, unless it's for one of the reasons mentioned above.
I do understand that you do this to have quick access to your pictures for the web etc. I do understand you do this to digitize your existing archive for the same reason. But you're welcome to convince me :-)
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-15-2014   #118
mrred
Registered User
 
mrred is offline
Join Date: Jan 2011
Age: 55
Posts: 4
When you develop BW film, you have access to an oasis of techniques that affect the look of what you shot. Aside from removing dust and other scanning related artifacts, I rarely do anything in PS other than levels. The look is already formed before it get's converted into digital.

My aim is for 'photo-real' and when I shoot digital, it just seems so cold and lifeless.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-16-2014   #119
A Y
Registered User
 
A Y is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 29
There's a whole community of people who shoot film, digitize it, and then print it on an inkjet printer. You get the best of all worlds: the tonal qualities and highlight response of film, and the power of digital post-processing which let you do things no one short of a master darkroom printer could do in the old days, and a bunch of things no one could do in the old days (eg. precise correction of geometric distortion). Once you have your print proof worked out, you can then replicate that print every single time on the printer.

TOP recently had an interesting example of this: http://theonlinephotographer.typepad...l-picture.html
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-14-2014   #120
bhop73
Registered User
 
bhop73's Avatar
 
bhop73 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 601
V700 for me.

B17 Bomber by bhop, on Flickr
__________________
my flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bhop73/
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 20:54.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.