gb hill
Mentor
Keep the scanner you got & get familiar with it. Ask yourself what you want to do with your scanned prints. If all you wish is to post on the web & make a few digital prints then your V700 is more than adequate. i just got a V500 but haven't had time to install it yet. I've been using one of those 5MP film scanners I bought for $40.00. Not the best but good for posting my photos.
Dwig
Well-known
+1, the v700 will give very good results and EpsonScan is very decent software when used in the "Professional" mode. Learn to use these before you give any thought to different software or a different scanner.
Personally, I use a v700 at home and I'm very satisfied with the results. It's not as good as the Imacon 848 that I use at work, but then I can only print 13x19 at home compared to the 29x44's I regularly print at work with the occasional 40x60. The dynamic range of the v700 is very good, but again not as good as the Imacon. Still, the scans compare favorably and the v700 will do a true full frame scan, something the Imacon can't do (much to my agrivation as the photographer I work for wants everything he can see on the film...).
peewee
Established
Cheers!.. I can't afford another scanner at the moment anyway..I Haven't seen an option in Epson scan for choosing which parts of the neg to scan, there are just thumb nails, that I have used.
venchka
Mentor
I don't the latest version, but there should be a tab for zooming on an individual thumbnail. Then use the mouse to draw a window in the zoomed view. It's much easier to do than to describe. Read the book. Also, I'm using Windows. A MAC might be slightly different. Look at Ken Lee's screen shots. You can see two tabs above the image. One for preview & one for zoom. Ken's screen shots are from a MAC.
This page should help.
http://www.kenleegallery.com/html/tech/scanning.php
Wayne
This page should help.
http://www.kenleegallery.com/html/tech/scanning.php
Wayne
Yoricko
Established
Epson V700 in professional mode is fine. Make sure you 'calibrate' your film holders height (you can do so with the V700/750) for maximum detail!
Do note it will never match the 18MP of the M9 unless you drum scan with slow films.
Do note it will never match the 18MP of the M9 unless you drum scan with slow films.
venchka
Mentor
Do you know anyone with an Epson scanner? They could show you everything you need to know in an hour. Maybe less. After that it's just practice, practice and a little more practice.
The Operating manual is available online if you don't have the printed version.
Wayne
The Operating manual is available online if you don't have the printed version.
Wayne
peewee
Established
Thankou all....
I don't know any film photographers but actually there's a famous one living near by, I'm in the sticks..thinking of asking for a favour in return for some gardening!
Iomorrow I am going to dedicate my day to this, fingers X
I don't know any film photographers but actually there's a famous one living near by, I'm in the sticks..thinking of asking for a favour in return for some gardening!
Iomorrow I am going to dedicate my day to this, fingers X
Dwig
Well-known
I'm running v3.04a on Windows XP and you have to uncheck the "Thumbnails" checkbox to enable the ability to manually marquee select the scanning area.
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
Lucy,
Keep using V700 for now but save for a used Nikon Coolscan 35mm scanner.
Or better yet, go towards where the fun really is, a 35mm enlarger like a Focomat. You'll go from "lazy digital shooter" to a modern darkroom printer.
peewee
Established
Thanks..
Mmmm, I love the idea of having a dark room but you giys would have to come and live with me for a while!!
Mmmm, I love the idea of having a dark room but you giys would have to come and live with me for a while!!
mdruziak
Established
One thing I will add to this. Try cropping the image in the scanning software so you don't get any black borders.
If black borders are included in the scanned image, the scanning software sees that as maximum black and it really confuses the automatic processing algorithms. This is because the black point should be set based on the maximum black of the image and not the borders.
If black borders are included in the scanned image, the scanning software sees that as maximum black and it really confuses the automatic processing algorithms. This is because the black point should be set based on the maximum black of the image and not the borders.
J450N
Member
That is caused by the software's AE "feature". My first step is always "Disable autoexposure" in the scanning software. The next steps are "disable every other auto setting that I can find".
That will prevent problems like the one described above, especially when scanning several images from the same set that are already exposed correctly. If the photos from a series are off, they are all off by the same amount and can be fixed with automated batch processing in post.NLewis
Established
BW film has a lot of exposure latitude. When you scan a high-contrast scene, the scanner automatically fits all the exposed range into a 0-255 digital range. In other words, if you have a scene with a lot of range (very strong highlights), the scanner will effectively reduce contrast to fit it in the digital range. You have to adjust it in post-processing to produce the contrast range you want.
peewee
Established
Useful points..Thanks a lot.
mojobebop
Well-known
subjective
subjective
i liked the shot. never get dof w/f4.
f8-11.
subjective
i liked the shot. never get dof w/f4.
f8-11.
kuzano
Mentor
Digital or Film... either one... Why f4??
Digital or Film... either one... Why f4??
Your problem on this image is a routine photography situation. You would be doing film a disservice by making this a film vs digital discussion. \
The thing that does take place between digital and film is the evolution of automation in the digital era. So many people have succumbed to that automation by letting the camera command the process, that a true understanding of composition, exposure, lighting, and other factors have been laid aside. Even with all that automation, it behooves the photographer to better understand all those elements and not get caught up in the differences of the media.
I shoot Digital and I stilll shoot more film. The best thing I ever did to learn the elements that transcend the differing capture media by having taken the NYIP correspondence course (New York Institute of Photography) in the 1960's
Your image would have been markedly different if you had used f16 or f22. But also, if you had used f4 on a digital camera, it would have looked like the same narrow DOF and primarily OOF as you got with film. Provided you had over-ridden the automation on digital and shot manually.
I hate to say this, but your problem is not changing to film. It's about understanding photography in general, rather than concerning yourself with the capture media. Again, don't blame the M7 or film.
Sorry to be critical here, but spend more time on elements of photography. The NYI program is still available, but if they have a digital photography class, and a photography class, I would opt for photography.
And that's also a huge problem with digital photography classes. They often spend WAY too much time on the digital operation of a camera, and not nearly enough on photography concepts that DID NOT CHANGE SUBSTANTIALLY with the advent of the digital technology.
"f11 and Be There"... one of the primary laws of successful photography. Secondly, understand the basic tool and the process. Learn about the relationship between the shutter speed, the fstop, and the nature of the light. Put the automation in the least important position, until you have mastered those three. They rule, even when you drag the automation back into the equation.
That in fact is where digital drops the ball. It's often mistaken as replacement for basic knowledge of photography.
I suggest you take the camera back out to that location and shoot that same image at manual setting of f22, even if you let the meter in the M7 dictate the shutter speed. Then look at just that ONE improvement (long DOF) which is so fundamental to a landscape shot... focus over a long distance. Can't get there with f4.
Oh yes, and one last point. Home scanning is truly BS unless you have a seriously pro scanner, like a Nikon 9000 (dedicated or such) No longer manufactured and used running $2000 to $4000.
While you are sorting out your feelings about film, just have your film processed and scanned in a good lab. Then, if you really think home processing and scanning is truly acceptable and less expensive, which I personally find ridiculous, move to that arena.
I do not and have not processed my own film for many years. Just no time and no place in the housing situations I have had. And I have gone the route of the flatbed scanners. Epson 500, 700 and 750 and personally find scanning a useless waste of my time, for the results. And I've been shooting film since the late fifties.
I still shoot more film than digital, but I pay to have my film processed and scanned for 135. Now for medium format (120), which is a far different animal, I will deign to scan, at least.
LET ME MAKE ONE MORE PERSONAL OBSERVATION ABOUT SCANNING.
I think you will be doing yourself a great favor if you have a pro scan your negs/transparencies until you get the photography stuff worked out. It will help you see the possibilites in a different way. Then pick up the scanning yourself. My experience came down to these two conclusions. I tried the Vuescan and made the mistake of trying to edit the image at the scan level. I finally concluded that I just needed to get a good scan (not an edited scan). So I went back to the Epson scan software, and set focus heights to get the best scans. I found that editing at the scan level, can have a negative effect (no pun) in the final editing software you use. It was better for me to get a good basic scan and work on the file in Photoshop (CS5) or Lightroom. Then these programs did not suffer from editing hacks done in the Epson software, or even more in Vuescan. I learned to turn off all the edit functions in Epson SW, and uncheck the thumbnails box, so I could set the scanning frame to the portion or image that I wanted to acquire in the scan.
Ultimately, I decided that since I could edit in more powerful programs like CS5 and Lightroom, it made more sense for me to have the film processor give me a CD with the high res scan choice at the processing lab. Very inexpensive because my time is worth $50-75 per hour when I have paying clients in my computer work.
Good luck. Keep shooting film. It will actually enhance your digital experience in the end.
Digital or Film... either one... Why f4??
... There is no appreciable DOF on large apertures. I think you would have had the same result with digital, shooting f4 at this particular subject. Don't blame film for what was not a film problem, or you will soon put down the M7 and go back to digital. All the exposure elements, focus elements including DOF, and compensation functions are relatively the same for digital and film.Hello
I am a beginner with film photography..Sold the M9 and got a used M7..
I developed my first rolls last night and scanned them today on my Epson V700..
Scanning is tricky, and obviously I'm learning the ropes with developing too.
I also have a Rolleiflex tlr and am quite pleased with the results but my M7 results are very disappointing.
This is one of the first shots I made with the M7 (and 50mm Summilux asph) of a long bank of cow parsley..I metered carefully and the aperture was at about F4, the light was nice, not too bright..I was interested in seeing the detail in the dof.
Most of the shots are rubbish that I took, I know I have a lot to learn with film but any tips about what I could be doing wrong here would be helpful..
Many Thanks.
Your problem on this image is a routine photography situation. You would be doing film a disservice by making this a film vs digital discussion. \
The thing that does take place between digital and film is the evolution of automation in the digital era. So many people have succumbed to that automation by letting the camera command the process, that a true understanding of composition, exposure, lighting, and other factors have been laid aside. Even with all that automation, it behooves the photographer to better understand all those elements and not get caught up in the differences of the media.
I shoot Digital and I stilll shoot more film. The best thing I ever did to learn the elements that transcend the differing capture media by having taken the NYIP correspondence course (New York Institute of Photography) in the 1960's
Your image would have been markedly different if you had used f16 or f22. But also, if you had used f4 on a digital camera, it would have looked like the same narrow DOF and primarily OOF as you got with film. Provided you had over-ridden the automation on digital and shot manually.
I hate to say this, but your problem is not changing to film. It's about understanding photography in general, rather than concerning yourself with the capture media. Again, don't blame the M7 or film.
Sorry to be critical here, but spend more time on elements of photography. The NYI program is still available, but if they have a digital photography class, and a photography class, I would opt for photography.
And that's also a huge problem with digital photography classes. They often spend WAY too much time on the digital operation of a camera, and not nearly enough on photography concepts that DID NOT CHANGE SUBSTANTIALLY with the advent of the digital technology.
"f11 and Be There"... one of the primary laws of successful photography. Secondly, understand the basic tool and the process. Learn about the relationship between the shutter speed, the fstop, and the nature of the light. Put the automation in the least important position, until you have mastered those three. They rule, even when you drag the automation back into the equation.
That in fact is where digital drops the ball. It's often mistaken as replacement for basic knowledge of photography.
I suggest you take the camera back out to that location and shoot that same image at manual setting of f22, even if you let the meter in the M7 dictate the shutter speed. Then look at just that ONE improvement (long DOF) which is so fundamental to a landscape shot... focus over a long distance. Can't get there with f4.
Oh yes, and one last point. Home scanning is truly BS unless you have a seriously pro scanner, like a Nikon 9000 (dedicated or such) No longer manufactured and used running $2000 to $4000.
While you are sorting out your feelings about film, just have your film processed and scanned in a good lab. Then, if you really think home processing and scanning is truly acceptable and less expensive, which I personally find ridiculous, move to that arena.
I do not and have not processed my own film for many years. Just no time and no place in the housing situations I have had. And I have gone the route of the flatbed scanners. Epson 500, 700 and 750 and personally find scanning a useless waste of my time, for the results. And I've been shooting film since the late fifties.
I still shoot more film than digital, but I pay to have my film processed and scanned for 135. Now for medium format (120), which is a far different animal, I will deign to scan, at least.
LET ME MAKE ONE MORE PERSONAL OBSERVATION ABOUT SCANNING.
I think you will be doing yourself a great favor if you have a pro scan your negs/transparencies until you get the photography stuff worked out. It will help you see the possibilites in a different way. Then pick up the scanning yourself. My experience came down to these two conclusions. I tried the Vuescan and made the mistake of trying to edit the image at the scan level. I finally concluded that I just needed to get a good scan (not an edited scan). So I went back to the Epson scan software, and set focus heights to get the best scans. I found that editing at the scan level, can have a negative effect (no pun) in the final editing software you use. It was better for me to get a good basic scan and work on the file in Photoshop (CS5) or Lightroom. Then these programs did not suffer from editing hacks done in the Epson software, or even more in Vuescan. I learned to turn off all the edit functions in Epson SW, and uncheck the thumbnails box, so I could set the scanning frame to the portion or image that I wanted to acquire in the scan.
Ultimately, I decided that since I could edit in more powerful programs like CS5 and Lightroom, it made more sense for me to have the film processor give me a CD with the high res scan choice at the processing lab. Very inexpensive because my time is worth $50-75 per hour when I have paying clients in my computer work.
Good luck. Keep shooting film. It will actually enhance your digital experience in the end.
philipus
ʎɐpɹəʇɥƃı&
I, respectfully, disagree with this. It depends on what one wants to use one's images for, in which context they're to be displayed and what levels of perfection one desires. Plenty of scanners are good enough.
Personally I'd rather scan a 'flat' scan myself than rely on a lab to do it but everyone's mileage varies.
Ranchu
-
I set it to scan the black/white borders, the largest thumbnail setting in configuration, crop later. Set autoexposure to minimum for a flat scan, it only adds an s curve. I leave the highlight curve on in the Tone Curve Viewer, but set the shadows to 'normal' -flat. I set the RGB gamma in the Histogram adjustment to 1.00 from whatever the auto makes it (it's the middle box) You want it to set auto color in configuration, I can't remember the specifics of that right now, and I cant open the software without the scanner plugged in, its not here. Scan into Epson srgb. Sharpening on low, you'll get some artifacts but no sharpening is really soft. After the scan you'll need to do midtone color correction in other software with an eyedropper on grey or by eye if you're shooting color.
edit: 'You want it to set auto color in configuration..' specifics = 'color control' and 'continuous auto exposure' both checked.
edit: 'You want it to set auto color in configuration..' specifics = 'color control' and 'continuous auto exposure' both checked.
Ranchu
-
Disagree too, you may not get all the resolution, but you still get the dynamic range and the color. That's why I'm shooting film. I'm not that fancy, I guess.
venchka
Mentor
Never have so many piled so much B.S. so high. I am certainly glad that I learned how to scan before reading this thread. I am doubly glad that my clients who bought prints from me didn't read this thread.
Y'all have fun. See ya.
Wayne
Y'all have fun. See ya.
Wayne