View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
philslizzy
Joined: 07 Aug 2012 Posts: 4744 Location: Cheshire, England
|
Posted: Thu Apr 11, 2013 10:13 am Post subject: Cheap film scanner vs Print scan and lab scan |
|
|
philslizzy wrote:
Ok, my Epson flatbed scanner with neg scan broke down not long before I joined this forum. So there was no way to scan my vast collection of slides and negs. So this project went on a back burner.
However I've been using film for a while now and not been happy with the quality of neg scans to CD from Jessops and ASDA.
OK Jessops is out of the equation so it leaves me with ADSA.
Recently Maplins were selling their £59.99 scanner for £14.99, so awash with small change I invested in one.
The photos were done on my Zeiss Contina III, exposing using the built in meter.
Let the photos do the talking.
The only PP I've done is to correct the neg scan, the original is here too.
A photo of the actual print
The neg, which is a little thin:
Print scan and 100% crop:
CD scan and 100% crop:
Straight neg scan and 100% crop:
Photoshopped neg scan and 100% crop:
Varied eh?
The straight print scan has the best colours and the cd scan although a little washed out is ok. But the neg scan, I think has the best detail and resolution but the software has this terrible 'auto correct' feature which needs work to sort it out.
I'll do some more _________________ Hero in the 'messin-with-cameras-for-the-hell-of-it department'. Official. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
std
Joined: 09 Feb 2010 Posts: 1826 Location: Bulgaria
|
Posted: Thu Apr 11, 2013 10:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
std wrote:
The output from this small scanner looks terrible - the CD scan from the lab is far better. _________________ Stefan
My lens list:
SLR MD: Rokkor 1,7/50 Exakta: Kilfitt-Makro-Kilar E 3.5/4cm; CZJ 2/50 Pancolar;M42: CZJ 2.8/50 Tessar; Mir-1B 2.8/37; Jupiter-9 2/85 T-mount: Tamron 5.9/200; Tamron 6.9/300; Tamron 7.5/400 C-mount: Cosmicar 1.8/50 Y/S: Sun 3.5/38-90, Sun 4/70-210 RF Contax RF: Jupiter-8 2/50; Contax G:CZ 2,8/21 Biogon T; CZ 2,8/28 Biogon T; CZ 2/35 Planar T; CZ 2/45 Planar T; CZ 2,8/90 Sonnar T |
|
Back to top |
|
|
philslizzy
Joined: 07 Aug 2012 Posts: 4744 Location: Cheshire, England
|
Posted: Thu Apr 11, 2013 10:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
philslizzy wrote:
std wrote: |
The output from this small scanner looks terrible - the CD scan from the lab is far better. |
I agree on the above scans
Some better exposed negs scanned
An original, straight scan:
Saturation boosted a bit(40%) - that's all:
and a 100% crop:
and a couple more:
I think it's not bad, quality wise, but the scanning software 'Arcsoft Mediaimpression' leaves a lot to be desired _________________ Hero in the 'messin-with-cameras-for-the-hell-of-it department'. Official. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
std
Joined: 09 Feb 2010 Posts: 1826 Location: Bulgaria
|
Posted: Thu Apr 11, 2013 2:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
std wrote:
The original non saturated scan looks pretty decent if you open the picture in new window.
About software you can try Vuescan in manual mode with lock the exposure and film base color like in this tutorial http://benneh.net/techshit/better-colour-neg-scanning-with-vuescan/ , but anyway i doubt that you can get a big improvement over the bundled soft. _________________ Stefan
My lens list:
SLR MD: Rokkor 1,7/50 Exakta: Kilfitt-Makro-Kilar E 3.5/4cm; CZJ 2/50 Pancolar;M42: CZJ 2.8/50 Tessar; Mir-1B 2.8/37; Jupiter-9 2/85 T-mount: Tamron 5.9/200; Tamron 6.9/300; Tamron 7.5/400 C-mount: Cosmicar 1.8/50 Y/S: Sun 3.5/38-90, Sun 4/70-210 RF Contax RF: Jupiter-8 2/50; Contax G:CZ 2,8/21 Biogon T; CZ 2,8/28 Biogon T; CZ 2/35 Planar T; CZ 2/45 Planar T; CZ 2,8/90 Sonnar T |
|
Back to top |
|
|
nurkov
Joined: 21 Feb 2013 Posts: 711 Location: United Kingdom
Expire: 2014-03-09
|
Posted: Thu Apr 11, 2013 3:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
nurkov wrote:
i gives you a lot of extra noise and it looks like digital color noise, quite terrible, probably would be better for black & white but still bad. J have paid 11 quid for my flatbed HP4850 and I get superb results comparing to that and I run it on windows 8 no problem at all. _________________ http://www.flickr.com/photos/34787419@N08/
Minolta and Canon user |
|
Back to top |
|
|
philslizzy
Joined: 07 Aug 2012 Posts: 4744 Location: Cheshire, England
|
Posted: Fri Apr 12, 2013 12:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
philslizzy wrote:
nurkov wrote: |
i gives you a lot of extra noise and it looks like digital color noise, quite terrible, probably would be better for black & white but still bad. J have paid 11 quid for my flatbed HP4850 and I get superb results comparing to that and I run it on windows 8 no problem at all. |
Yeah, I think I overdid the saturation, looking at it now.
I'm hammering the slides, you seem to get better scans from slides. Here's a couple:
The colour is almost gone from this slide, what you see here is fairly accurate
This is a model at my night class, taken on Agfa Dia-Direct B&W slide film
EDIT: I didn't know you could open these pics on a new page and magnify them. The b&w scan does have a lot of 'colour' noise in the shadows,
But y'know what; I'm happy I can see my old slides again. I scanned slides in I've never even seen before, unopened packets from P.O. Box 14 and Deer Park Road if anyone remembers them! For new stuff I think I'm gonna have to get a good scanner.
oooh, here's a few blasts from the past: Who remembers what they were? Orwo, Dia-Direct, Ferrania, CT18, E4, C22, FP4, HP3 and Cibachrome!! _________________ Hero in the 'messin-with-cameras-for-the-hell-of-it department'. Official. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
GrahamNR17
Joined: 17 Jan 2009 Posts: 1855 Location: Norfolk, UK
Expire: 2012-09-06
|
Posted: Fri Apr 12, 2013 5:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
GrahamNR17 wrote:
These kinds of "scanners" seem universally crap, but I have to confess that's the best performance I've seen from one. I'd go as far as to say it's acceptable for general use. The one I had suffered mostly from extremely low dynamic range, and the results looked more like 256 colour GIFs |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Digitalriver
Joined: 14 Oct 2012 Posts: 33 Location: River Mersey
|
Posted: Sat Apr 27, 2013 2:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
Digitalriver wrote:
Looking at the scans I start to think whether its worth me getting scsi pc card to connect my old canon film scanner to my pc? Its been given to me as a present years back ,but never used. Does anyone know if 2720dpi film scanner would produce decent results?
thx |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Excalibur
Joined: 19 Jul 2009 Posts: 5017 Location: UK
Expire: 2014-04-21
|
Posted: Sat Apr 27, 2013 6:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
Excalibur wrote:
Digitalriver wrote: |
Looking at the scans I start to think whether its worth me getting scsi pc card to connect my old canon film scanner to my pc? Its been given to me as a present years back ,but never used. Does anyone know if 2720dpi film scanner would produce decent results?
thx |
If it is a TRUE 2720dpi (suspicious advertising) then it's ok for posting shots on a forum and about 8"X10" print. In fact the supermarket 1600 X 1200 scans produce very good shots for posting on forums e.g. :-
Agfa vista film in supermarket for £1 and 36 exp scanned at a supermarket and touched up in Photoshop (usually for spots and too much contrast and brightness). Rikenon 28mm
_________________ Canon A1, AV1, T70 & T90, EOS 300 and EOS300v, Chinon CE and CP-7M. Contax 139, Fuji STX-2, Konica Autoreflex TC, FS-1, FT-1, Minolta X-700, X-300, XD-11, SRT101b, Nikon EM, FM, F4, F90X, Olympus OM2, Pentax S3, Spotmatic, Pentax ME super, Praktica TL 5B, & BC1, , Ricoh KR10super, Yashica T5D, Bronica Etrs, Mamiya RB67 pro AND drum roll:- a Sony Nex 3
.........past gear Tele Rolleiflex and Rollei SL66.
Many lenses from good to excellent. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Digitalriver
Joined: 14 Oct 2012 Posts: 33 Location: River Mersey
|
Posted: Sat Apr 27, 2013 12:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Digitalriver wrote:
Thanks for the advice!!!
P.s I had my agfa vista scanned in asda few days ago , I asked the girl if they could save the images in tiff, she answered no, just jpeg. I would be much happier with asda results if only she would say YES |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Excalibur
Joined: 19 Jul 2009 Posts: 5017 Location: UK
Expire: 2014-04-21
|
Posted: Sat Apr 27, 2013 1:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Excalibur wrote:
Digitalriver wrote: |
Thanks for the advice!!!
P.s I had my agfa vista scanned in asda few days ago , I asked the girl if they could save the images in tiff, she answered no, just jpeg. I would be much happier with asda results if only she would say YES |
At my Asda I asked about scanning negs and she said as long as they are at least three frames long, then she would do up to 36 exp and put them on a CD for £2 .....and it would be interesting to see if she and the machine can get the colours right on my 50 year old colour negs in a profitable time......... _________________ Canon A1, AV1, T70 & T90, EOS 300 and EOS300v, Chinon CE and CP-7M. Contax 139, Fuji STX-2, Konica Autoreflex TC, FS-1, FT-1, Minolta X-700, X-300, XD-11, SRT101b, Nikon EM, FM, F4, F90X, Olympus OM2, Pentax S3, Spotmatic, Pentax ME super, Praktica TL 5B, & BC1, , Ricoh KR10super, Yashica T5D, Bronica Etrs, Mamiya RB67 pro AND drum roll:- a Sony Nex 3
.........past gear Tele Rolleiflex and Rollei SL66.
Many lenses from good to excellent. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
philslizzy
Joined: 07 Aug 2012 Posts: 4744 Location: Cheshire, England
|
Posted: Sat Apr 27, 2013 6:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
philslizzy wrote:
Digitalriver wrote: |
Looking at the scans I start to think whether its worth me getting scsi pc card to connect my old canon film scanner to my pc? Its been given to me as a present years back ,but never used. Does anyone know if 2720dpi film scanner would produce decent results?
thx |
I think if it's a Canon, it ought to be a good one. Mine uses a generic built-in camera.It's ok.
A scsi PCI card only costs about 5 pounds on ebay I think it's worth a go. Probably better than buying a new cheap scanner (like mine)
Digitalriver wrote: |
Thanks for the advice!!!
P.s I had my agfa vista scanned in asda few days ago , I asked the girl if they could save the images in tiff, she answered no, just jpeg. I would be much happier with asda results if only she would say YES |
If they did save them in TIFF they would still be the same resolution wouldn't they? do you think it would be much different than JPG? _________________ Hero in the 'messin-with-cameras-for-the-hell-of-it department'. Official. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Digitalriver
Joined: 14 Oct 2012 Posts: 33 Location: River Mersey
|
Posted: Sun Apr 28, 2013 1:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
Digitalriver wrote:
If they did save them in TIFF they would still be the same resolution wouldn't they? do you think it would be much different than JPG?
Tiff file format is a lot less compressed , so it would at least contain more and better dynamic range , the image in general would be much better!! Tiff format is also much better to post process. But then again , 2£ is a bargain,and also, it is a supermarket not a pro-lab!!! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Excalibur
Joined: 19 Jul 2009 Posts: 5017 Location: UK
Expire: 2014-04-21
|
Posted: Sun Apr 28, 2013 8:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
Excalibur wrote:
With a 35mm neg this is what a home scan looks like on a computer screen, dev at Boots and scanned by me with a Epson V750 (true dpi is about 2500) in JPG format, using a cheap consumer Canon FD 28mm, and years ago I didn't have the skills to sharpen, de-noise\grain etc and haven't re scanned it since. Film was OOD Superia 200.
Hand the neg to a good lab and you can get results like this, notice the size by comparing the cigarette packet, the white smudge is because I used flash:-
_________________ Canon A1, AV1, T70 & T90, EOS 300 and EOS300v, Chinon CE and CP-7M. Contax 139, Fuji STX-2, Konica Autoreflex TC, FS-1, FT-1, Minolta X-700, X-300, XD-11, SRT101b, Nikon EM, FM, F4, F90X, Olympus OM2, Pentax S3, Spotmatic, Pentax ME super, Praktica TL 5B, & BC1, , Ricoh KR10super, Yashica T5D, Bronica Etrs, Mamiya RB67 pro AND drum roll:- a Sony Nex 3
.........past gear Tele Rolleiflex and Rollei SL66.
Many lenses from good to excellent. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
philslizzy
Joined: 07 Aug 2012 Posts: 4744 Location: Cheshire, England
|
Posted: Sun Apr 28, 2013 10:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
philslizzy wrote:
The Epson V750 is outside my price league but I'm looking for a better-than-this scanner.
Heres a photo I took with my Olympus 35 RC a few weeks ago. I have scanned it in Tiff and Jpg I see no difference with this scanner.
close ups
I've just developed my first B&W film in over 30 years, It curls like crazy, in the old days you could flatten it in the neg carrier, how the heck do I do it in a film scanner?? _________________ Hero in the 'messin-with-cameras-for-the-hell-of-it department'. Official.
Last edited by philslizzy on Sun Apr 28, 2013 11:40 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Excalibur
Joined: 19 Jul 2009 Posts: 5017 Location: UK
Expire: 2014-04-21
|
Posted: Sun Apr 28, 2013 11:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
Excalibur wrote:
philslizzy wrote: |
The Epson V750 is outside my price league but I'm looking for a better-than-this scanner.
Heres a photo I took with my Olympus 35 RC a few weeks aho. I have scanned it in Tiff and Jpg I see no difference with this scanner.
close ups
I've just developed my first B&W film in over 30 years, It curls like crazy, in the old days you could flatten it in the neg carrier, how the heck do I do it in a film scanner?? |
Interesting comparison with Tiff and JPG, and someone said if you are continually altering and saving a JPG image it degrades the quality
Well the older recommended Epson scanners are just as good as the V750, and I only got the V750 because it was going for £90 and am disappointed it's not much better than a £20,000 Fuji frontier at Asda _________________ Canon A1, AV1, T70 & T90, EOS 300 and EOS300v, Chinon CE and CP-7M. Contax 139, Fuji STX-2, Konica Autoreflex TC, FS-1, FT-1, Minolta X-700, X-300, XD-11, SRT101b, Nikon EM, FM, F4, F90X, Olympus OM2, Pentax S3, Spotmatic, Pentax ME super, Praktica TL 5B, & BC1, , Ricoh KR10super, Yashica T5D, Bronica Etrs, Mamiya RB67 pro AND drum roll:- a Sony Nex 3
.........past gear Tele Rolleiflex and Rollei SL66.
Many lenses from good to excellent. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
nurkov
Joined: 21 Feb 2013 Posts: 711 Location: United Kingdom
Expire: 2014-03-09
|
Posted: Sun Apr 28, 2013 12:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
nurkov wrote:
mine does not I just leave it hanging from wet stage over night with small weight at the bottom and cut it next day in pieces by 6 frames and is reasonably flat. _________________ http://www.flickr.com/photos/34787419@N08/
Minolta and Canon user |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Digitalriver
Joined: 14 Oct 2012 Posts: 33 Location: River Mersey
|
Posted: Sun Apr 28, 2013 6:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Digitalriver wrote:
Excalibur wrote: |
With a 35mm neg this is what a home scan looks like on a computer screen, dev at Boots and scanned by me with a Epson V750 (true dpi is about 2500) in JPG format, using a cheap consumer Canon FD 28mm, and years ago I didn't have the skills to sharpen, de-noise\grain etc and haven't re scanned it since. Film was OOD Superia 200.
Hand the neg to a good lab and you can get results like this, notice the size by comparing the cigarette packet, the white smudge is because I used flash:-
|
Lovely result!! If my canon FS2710 scanner , will produce similar results , I will be more than happy!!! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Digitalriver
Joined: 14 Oct 2012 Posts: 33 Location: River Mersey
|
Posted: Sun Apr 28, 2013 6:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Digitalriver wrote:
philslizzy wrote: |
The Epson V750 is outside my price league but I'm looking for a better-than-this scanner.
Heres a photo I took with my Olympus 35 RC a few weeks ago. I have scanned it in Tiff and Jpg I see no difference with this scanner.
close ups
I've just developed my first B&W film in over 30 years, It curls like crazy, in the old days you could flatten it in the neg carrier, how the heck do I do it in a film scanner?? |
I dont see much difference either , but its for certain , that, we could extract more from tiff in pp.
Last edited by Digitalriver on Sun Apr 28, 2013 11:00 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Excalibur
Joined: 19 Jul 2009 Posts: 5017 Location: UK
Expire: 2014-04-21
|
Posted: Sun Apr 28, 2013 9:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Excalibur wrote:
[quote="Digitalriver"]
Excalibur wrote: |
Lovely result!! If my canon FS2710 scanner , will produce similar results , I will be more than happy!!! |
Thanks and I assume the picture in the frame was drum scanned as I was amazed at the quality... but remember the models before V750\V700 are very good also, but unfortunately others know this on ebay so the prices are higher than they should be for old equipment.
Unfortunately a flatbed scanner will never get the best out of a 35mm neg film and no manufacture is bothering to do anything about it (I assume because they think film is dead\dying) but the good news is..... they are very good for scanning MF negs. _________________ Canon A1, AV1, T70 & T90, EOS 300 and EOS300v, Chinon CE and CP-7M. Contax 139, Fuji STX-2, Konica Autoreflex TC, FS-1, FT-1, Minolta X-700, X-300, XD-11, SRT101b, Nikon EM, FM, F4, F90X, Olympus OM2, Pentax S3, Spotmatic, Pentax ME super, Praktica TL 5B, & BC1, , Ricoh KR10super, Yashica T5D, Bronica Etrs, Mamiya RB67 pro AND drum roll:- a Sony Nex 3
.........past gear Tele Rolleiflex and Rollei SL66.
Many lenses from good to excellent. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
philslizzy
Joined: 07 Aug 2012 Posts: 4744 Location: Cheshire, England
|
Posted: Sun Apr 28, 2013 9:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
philslizzy wrote:
nurkov wrote: |
mine does not I just leave it hanging from wet stage over night with small weight at the bottom and cut it next day in pieces by 6 frames and is reasonably flat. |
Which is exactly what I did, BTW the film curves between the perforations - not along it's length.
In 20 years of developing my own film I'd only had it a few times, perhaps its the particular film base or something.
maybe its the cold rinse water?
anyone any ideas?
Digitalriver wrote: |
I dont see much difference either , but its for certain that, we could extract more form tiff in pp. |
Good point, the scanner is now set to tiff. Thanks! _________________ Hero in the 'messin-with-cameras-for-the-hell-of-it department'. Official. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Digitalriver
Joined: 14 Oct 2012 Posts: 33 Location: River Mersey
|
Posted: Sun Apr 28, 2013 10:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Digitalriver wrote:
philslizzy wrote: |
Which is exactly what I did, BTW the film curves between the perforations - not along it's length.
In 20 years of developing my own film I'd only had it a few times, perhaps its the particular film base or something.
maybe its the cold rinse water? |
drying time is too quick ??? Temp of the air is high? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
philslizzy
Joined: 07 Aug 2012 Posts: 4744 Location: Cheshire, England
|
Posted: Sun Apr 28, 2013 11:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
philslizzy wrote:
Digitalriver wrote: |
philslizzy wrote: |
Which is exactly what I did, BTW the film curves between the perforations - not along it's length.
In 20 years of developing my own film I'd only had it a few times, perhaps its the particular film base or something.
maybe its the cold rinse water? |
drying time is too quick ??? Temp of the air is high? |
No, I hung the film up in the kitchen late at night, no heating, just normal air temperature. Film drying cabinets wouldn't be much use if warm air made the film curl. _________________ Hero in the 'messin-with-cameras-for-the-hell-of-it department'. Official. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|