PDA

View Full Version : Scanner for Photo Archival purposes


Dave00
Dec 13, 2004, 11:20 AM
Hi all,

I need to scan some photo prints in for archiving, and I'm not real satisfied with my current scanner (Canon) which I've used the past couple years. It seems to have problems picking up subtle color gradients, so the pictures wind up looking overly contrasted. In talking to others, this seems to be an extremely common problem. Anyone know of a solution?

Thanks!
--D

vjfoxy
Dec 13, 2004, 11:37 AM
In a similar position - in that I'm looking for a scanner to digitise my wives film slide collection (approx 2000 slides). At first I was looking for film specific scanners (for film negative and slides). I've now heard Canon have dropped this dedicated line and replaced it with scanners such as the i9950 (thats the Euro name).

I find the http://www.photo-i.co.uk/ site provides some useful tips.

Good luck.

Mr. Anderson
Dec 13, 2004, 12:14 PM
Odd, I just was thinking about this the other day as well. I'm in the market for a slide scanner - I've used the Nikon's before and I'm tempted to go buy one myself - the prices have come down a bit.

But are there any good sites that have decent comprehensive reviews of all the slide scanners?

D

el greenerino
Dec 20, 2004, 05:59 AM
You could probably take what you need scanned to a service bereau, they'd probably do a better job than anything the average home user would. Just make sure they're reputable and use equipment that's better han what they use at walgreens :p

Dave00
Dec 20, 2004, 09:25 AM
of course, taking them in to a photo shop is always an option, but for alot of photos, it becomes more cost-effective to buy your own scanner. Was just wondering which was considered to have especially good color fidelity.

dave

aricher
Dec 20, 2004, 10:37 AM
A service bureau is way to expensive in the long run. I have over 25,000 slides of my Grandfather's to scan for a gallery show/book next year. Getting them pro-scanned would break the bank. I think I'll be buying a couple of dedicated slide scanners. I'm leaning towards Nikon's scanners - that digitalICE software is great.

el greenerino
Dec 20, 2004, 02:45 PM
Well if you get a negative and slide scanner and decide ou don't need it anymore, drop me a PM ;)

CalfCanuck
Dec 20, 2004, 05:14 PM
The Nikon line, with digital ICE (as mentioned above) are a very capable line. I have the earlier Coolscan 4000, with the optional (but critical) scan feeder. It costs more, but when scanning thousands of images it was well worth it.

I believe the new Coolscan 5000 line is both improved and cheaper, so I'd look into that if you have a large quantity of images to scan.

My feeder (I believe they've modified the current feeder) needed a few modifications (searchable via google) to work with thinner cardboard mounts, but once done it worked fairly well. Plastic mounts were never a problem. Of course one had the odd jam, and all images still needed the normal digital darkroom work in Photoshop. But that's standard for every image.

Edit - Just saw your "25,000 images to scan". Be sure to get scanning ASAP - I find that my limit is about 100 per day, allowing time for each image in photoshop.

If I was you, i'd be more selective and only scan the images you were at least considering printing

CalfCanuck
Dec 20, 2004, 05:41 PM
Someone was asking about scanner reviews - not too much that's current out there. Many reviews date from the late 90's!! I guess the push to digital cameras killed most of the market.

http://www.bythom.com/coolscanv.htm

I should note that the 4000ED is my third generation dedicated 35mm scanner. I bought a first generation Nikon personal scanner back in 1993. Hard to get a good scan, as it's dynamic range was pretty bad. My second generation was a Polaroid Sprintscan from 1998. Much better, but single feed and still spotty with complicated slides. I bought the Nikon 4000 in 2003 and have been VERY happy with its performance.

Peyote
Dec 20, 2004, 05:58 PM
Dynamic Range was one thing I was about to mention. I don't know a lot about 35MM only scanners, but I know that when I'm looking for a flatbed scanner, I won't buy anything with a DMax under 3.4. Even 3.4 is pushing it IMHO, and really 3.8 is where it's at.

That is an often overlooked specification. It basically tells you how wide of a range of contrast it can scan. The higher the better.