Epson 4490 scans (Oly 35RC)

[Katastrofo]

Finally set up the Epson 4490 scanner. This is scanned at 2400 dpi and
using Digital Ice. Film was Fujicolor 400.





Bill

[Orio]

Are you happy Bill?
I think you should be, these are very good scans.
Now next good thing you should do, is get Noise Ninja.
It does not cost much, and it's the best tool for noise.
With the 4490 + Noise Ninja, you are set for a long time.

_

[Katastrofo]

Yes, I believe I'm happy with this scanner! This is a smaller scanner than
my 2450 and fits better on my desktop. I have Noise Ninja plugin with
my PS Elements 4.0, but used CS3 for PP on these.

Bill

[Katastrofo]

Here's one more in both color and bw:





I've edited with pics using Neat Image which seems a little better. I
still will be getting Noise Ninja, but am curious as to what version most
of you guys use.(?) I don't like the loss of detail Neat Image does, maybe
it does a better job with the paid version.

My Noise Ninja plugin is just a trial version and ends up with a grid over
it. Noise Ninja's little way of telling me to pony up or bugger off!

Bill

[Katastrofo]

Burning the midnight oil, well 3 hours past midnight:





This is scanning in pro mode, dust removal, 1200dpi, and converted to
black and white.

Bill

[Orio]

My personal experience is, do not use dust removal while scanning, it's best to do that afterwards with a dedicated plugin.
The image quality of the scanner is good as you can see, it will not be like a dedicated film scanner but I think it's decidedly above average for a flatbed scanner.

[Katastrofo]

Thanks, Orio,
I guess it boils down to I need to experiment more. I'll leave off the
dust removal next time. I didn't use USM during the scanning process,
either.

Bill

[bob955i]

@ Bill:

Pony up for NN - it makes a huge difference and is well worth having. You can download profiles for your camera, create your own profile or have the program analyse each image individually.

I still use my old Minolta DiMage 7i and it completely transforms the images I get from that cam.

I'd be happy with the IQ of those scans by the way.

[Katastrofo]

Thanks, Bob. Should I get the deluxe $79.95 package (pro version) or
the home version? Curious as to which one you guys have.

Bill

[Orio]

I have the Pro Bundle, because of the 16 bit processing.
Do not make the mistake of getting standard version, it is only 8 bit and your images will suffer from it, especially the digital images.
Pro costs more but 16 bit is 16 bit.

By the way, I really hate this widespread mania of calling software versions "Pro". It's like saying "if you can not afford the best version, you are an unworthy photographer".

[Katastrofo]

I thought that was the version you used, just wanted to make sure.

Bill

[Katastrofo]

Here's one of my older pics of the boxter series that was never scanned:



I can see the "Michelin" on the rear tire just fine. I think these little cams
like Kodak 200 film.

This was scanned at 2400dpi.

Bill

[Orio]

wow Bill!
The right lens-film-scanner combination can get very close to digital quality.

_

[bob955i]

It's the "Pro" version I have too Bill - for the same reason as Orio in that it supports 16 bit processing.

And that is one damn good scan....

[Laurence]

I am impressed by the 4490. It is cleaner, much cleaner than my Epson 2450.

The scan of the Boxster is magnificent. You are getting your money's worth, and it turns out this is a GREAT buy you made.

[Katastrofo]

@Bob, thanks for the kind words and info.

Larry, yes, this last scan really showed me the difference between the
2450 and the 4490. And for $86 including shipping, is a steal! This scanner
is noticeably smaller and lighter than the 2450, cooler looking, too. I
didn't use anything but USM in this scan, which some people have advised
to do USM in CS3/Photoshop. But I've seen people advise using USM in
scanning on some photo.net forums as well. Scans are very fast at
2400dpi, much faster than the 2450.

Bill

[Orio]

If you set it at 1200 it will also find the time to make you a Moka coffee

[Katastrofo]

[themoleman342]

Any thoughts on the epson v500? I'm trying to cut down on film lab scanning costs...plus their scans have really not impressed me lately. I still don't have the money for a high-end slr dig and I still love film...so I thought this might be a good go-between.

Thanks in advance
~Marc

[Orio]

[themoleman342]

I use a program called GIMP...not sure if it has been mentioned in this forum before or if anyone has used it. It's a very very good free photo editing software. It's a tad clunky in operation but all the features are there. It has been described as the "free photoshop."

I recommend trying it out...at least for kicks.

[Orio]

Photoshop Elements 4 has an important advantage over GIMP, it supports 16 bit depth colours editing.

[Katastrofo]

The Epson V500 has impressive performance. If Epson didn't have this
sale on the 4490, that is the scanner I probably would have gotten.

Here's an example of a 35mm scan, but view his other samples as well:

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?p=665627#post665627

Bill

[themoleman342]

well I will more than likely be buying the v500 in the next month or so, so I will definately get some of the pictures up soon (if not on here, than on flickr)