scanner testing: don't try this at home

Nesster · Expire: 2014-02-20

From last summer, a Sensia slide, Nikon FE, Nikkor-N 24 2.8, as scanned by Dwayne's

The result is excellent, when I first posted a couple from this roll, we thought Dwayne's used a good profile for Sensia.

What's nagged at me ever since: could I do better or at least match this with my Epson 4490? The answer, sadly seems to be NO.

This is a good thing in that I just pay Dwayne to scan and save all my trouble. This is a bad thing in that I pay Dwayne. And this isn't too encouraging for me... I'll hate to see if I can't better Dwayne with medium format color negatives.

Anyway, here for reference is an approx 200% crop from Dwayne's scan. I decided to enlarge to match the 2400 dpi scans with the Epson, rather than do 1200 dpi or downsize Epson. (I'm trying to give the 4490 every advantage!)

Same bit, at 100% with Epson software

And with VueScan

I did at least 2 tries with both Epson and VueScan. In order to maximize range, I moved the bright slider all the way to the right with both. But I still see clipping with both.

VueScan looks very blurry. I had the software set for 3 passes, maybe this is a culprit? Even the Epson isn't the greatest.

Epson gave a red cast that did correct out (mostly) with auto-levels, though I'm sure there's a better way. The VueScan came out yellower, again corrected with auto levels. The flower is more magenta with the 4490 than from Dwaune's.

This is sort of a depressing result.

lulalake · Expire: 2011-11-18

The 4990 is a sharp scanner and Vuescan is a very good software but you have two issues that you are dealing with here. First, yes. Multiple scans IS one of the issues. When the flatbed makes multiple scans it actually re-scans the entire picture by making another pass. The lens never returns to the exact same starting place therefore multiple scans will be a bit blurry. This is meant to defeat the noise.

Next is that a non-focusing flatbed may be out of tolerance, that is, the lens has moved so that focal plane is not where the film is. It might be above or below so a focus test may be in order by raising and lowering the film holder with shims or by using one of Doug Fishers adjustable film holders (They work well).

http://www.betterscanning.com/

Great Epson scanning forum

http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Epson_Scanners/

Cheers

Jules

Nesster · Expire: 2014-02-20

Yes, these are mounted slides, so I was thinking of raising them slightly to see if that improved focus. I've had better results from VueScan than from Epson software with negatives in the Epson holder, so I think there's some room for improvement.

Seems the magenta cast on the flower is a 4490 characteristc, and the blown-out yellow in the flower to the lower left.

Based on my understanding, the multiple passes are also to increase shadow detail, which in this case is not a big requirement. I'll keep trying as the spirit moves me, and at some point I'll try this slide with a slide copier also.

Katastrofo · Expire: 2013-11-19

When it comes to medium format, Dewies can probably do a better job
with that, too. But doing them at home, I don't have to mail them out,
WAIT, PAY, to see them on my computer screen.

Koni Rapid Omega 100:

Last shot with the Auto Up #1, expired Provia, how I managed not to get
a single bloom in focus is beyond me. Laughing

Katastrofo · Expire: 2013-11-19

Jussi, try to find a place that uses the Frontier scanner. It gives a 6MB
scan to 35mm where the Noritsu does 5MB. The quality is supposed to
be better, too, according to what I read at Photo.net and RFF. Going to
ask Russ (who has all his 35mm professionally scanned) what scanner
they use.

Nesster · Expire: 2014-02-20

the implications here to doing B&W at home are a bit worrysome - especially 35mm - if I'm consistently loosing sharpness. I'd hoped to not have to get the betterscanning holder.

On the other hand, perhaps the Epson is optimized for negatives, where any clipping is effectively to shadows.

Katastrofo · Expire: 2013-11-19

Maybe....keep in mind our 4490 has a DMax of 3.4, where it is better to
have at least 4 for shadow detail in slides. This is what I've read on the
matter, and listening to folklore in other places. Smile

Nesster · Expire: 2014-02-20

Yes, I can see why - the clipping on slides happens on the bright end, and no amount of histogram stretching will get that back.

Having to shell out bigger money to get good scans just rubs me the wrong way. I'll continue investigating

Katastrofo · Expire: 2013-11-19

Why blow against the wind? Just get the Coolscan 9000 and your troubles
will be over...good luck in divorce court. Laughing

Actually, my idea to upgrade
is the V700, just waiting for Epson to have another sale and I'll pull the
trigger. The V700/750 are seldom offered on sale, tho.

That is the one reason why I haven't gotten Doug's holders: the 4490
holders couldn't be used on the V700.

The one thing I need to check is if the V700 does large format, if it doesn't
it will be the V750.

visualopsins · Expire: 2025-04-11

I wonder if aligning layered single scans at pixel level in PP gives sharper results; it should if scan tolerances vary by more than 1/2 of 1/dpi-setting during multiple scan. Those tolerances seem real tight for scan mechanics in relatively inexpensive scanner.

Some HDR software image alignment algorithm might be better than Vuescan or Epson. Even a great panorama stitch could work better.

marty · Joined: 09 Apr 2009 Posts: 767 Location: Italy

Hi, there.
I've never made any specific test on the subject but I agree, slides tend to be more difficult to extract than negatives. Often, I think the dynamic range is simply beyond the scanner capability. For me the worst problem is film flatness, the original holder has serious trouble if the film is just a bit less than perfectly flat. Lately I had to scan some old negs for a friend, they were badly curved, a nightmare... I've read using a bellows with a macro lens and slide duplicator (the good old way to make dupes) can give good results and possibly faster.

Bill, V700 and V750 are basically the same thing, just the optics are different (maybe something about coating, I don't remember exactly). Both can do LF up to 8x10".

Cheers, M.-

peterqd · Expire: 2014-01-04

Katastrofo · Expire: 2013-11-19

Marty and Peter, thanks! The V700 looks like the Holy Grail to me. I don't
have space for both a flatbed and a dedicated film scanner, and this
would fit the bill handily.

peterqd · Expire: 2014-01-04

What sold me on the V700 is the nice flat top, another place to put er.. stuff I might need sometime. Smile

Katastrofo · Expire: 2013-11-19