epson perfection v500 still recommended?

[pna]

My father was an incredible photographer, and I've been gradually using the scancafe service to digitize his slides and negatives so that they can be more easily viewed by others in my family. Overall, scancafe has been great, and outsourcing the job to them was the right choice for me, as there's no way I had the time to scan his negatives properly, and the job would never have gotten done.

I've recently found a reasonable number of his black and white prints, though, that I'd also like to have digitized. I don't have the negatives for these, but even if I did, I'd like to scan the prints themselves as he did a lot wonderful interpretation in the darkroom. These I feel I can do myself, I just need to pick up a reasonable scanner.

I read a bunch of reviews, and searched these forums, and keep coming up with the Epson Perfection V500. It's gotten pretty cheap over the years ($135 shipped), and seems to have all of the features that I'd want. I'm not concerned with scanning negatives with this scanner, it would primarily be 8x10 black and white prints.

My only surprise was that it seems like this scanner has been out for a few years now. That's fine with me, as it seems like it was good then, I'm just wondering if I'm missing any updates that have followed it.

Can anyone weigh in on the V500 for black and white prints in particular, or offer an alternate recommendation for something that improves on it? I'd appreciate any thoughts.

 

[BigRedOne]

Bump for information on the Epson Perfection Photo V500 scanner. Thinking about purchasing the same scanner to copy parents and my old photo prints. Anybody have any recent usage information on this scanner?

 

[snberk103]

I've got the V700 - don't know how that compares to the V500. I'll let you figure out if it's close or not ...

My remarks are specifically for the 'pro-sumer' versions. That is, the flat-beds that also do negatives. Film only scanners are a different segment.

I did a bunch of reading too, and what I concluded is that there is not going to be much more money spent making scanners "better" (in the optical sense). There is no profit to be made sinking a money into research to scan negatives "better" since the film is on the say out (supposedly). And scanners can already scan a print at resolutions that exceed what any normal person would need. So, the current crop of high-end flat-beds is as good as they are going to get, in all probability. Cheaper, perhaps, for awhile... but not better. This conclusion was also shared by a number of the reviews I read too.

Of course, this opinion is worth exactly what you paid for it.

ps... I like the V700 very much, though I haven't done many scans from prints with it. Something that may change in the next few weeks.

cheers

 

[BigRedOne]

Thanks for your input. I think it justifies my decision to continue on with the V500 since I am just going to be copying prints. But I'll look at the V700 as well .

 

[snberk103]

Thanks for your input. I think it justifies my decision to continue on with the V500 since I am just going to be copying prints. But I'll look at the V700 as well .

You're welcome. I got the V700 specifically for it's film capability. It is nearly as good as a drum scanner (according to the reviews I read), and I figure if I need that extra bit quality I can get the occasional neg scanned. I have a variety of formats, and so a straight neg-scanner was not really an option.

If you are doing mostly prints, then the V700 may be more than you need.

Regardless of which software you use, I would look at VueScan for the software, though the built in Apple Image Capture is OK for quick jobs.

Good Luck.

 

[luminosity]

I have the V500 and it has been nice for me. I recently got a third party addition for it in the form of a glass holder for the negatives, which I got from betterscan.com. It pushes the negatives more firmly onto the glass than the OEM holder does on its own.

 

[BigRedOne]

Not trying to steal a post, but thanks for the input. I just ordered an Epson V500. Luminosity, nice pictures! snbeak103, I will look into Vuescan, plus, I was thinking since Aperture is so cheap right now. I may go with that instead of iPhoto, but haven't made my mind up on that one yet.

By the way, I ordered the Epson for $125, not bad.

 

[carlgo]

It doesn't take the latest and greatest to scan photos or other reflective surfaces. A V500 would be great and is quite affordable.

A V700-750 obviously would also work and could also do negatives and slides from 35mm to 8x10, but they cost far more.

 

[luminosity]

If you haven't started using iPhoto, don't start. If you've started, stop. Use Aperture or Lightroom (particularly the latter) so you can use a real program that's designed for professionals, rather than iPhoto, which is designed for average people who don't take photography as seriously.

 

[carlgo]

I have the V500 and it has been nice for me. I recently got a third party addition for it in the form of a glass holder for the negatives, which I got from betterscan.com. It pushes the negatives more firmly onto the glass than the OEM holder does on its own.

Like your photos. Is your holder the kind that uses a liquid? Also, my new used v700's holders keep the negative slightly above the glass in the 35mm, med format and 4x5 sizes, but 8x10 and odd sizes go directly onto the glass.

A day's worth of scanning killed my mbp dead! Was fixed by Apple because of the graphics chip issue. Beware that high resolutions scans can slow even a decent computer down and heat it up pretty good...

 

[luminosity]

Well, my MBP allows you to choose between using the dedicated video card and using the integrated video, and for 99.9% of the time since I've had it, I've used the integrated video. Hasn't been an issue.

The holder I use is just glass. Nothing but glass, to fit inside the space provided by the OEM holder part.

Also, thank you .

Only one of those images actually means much to me.

My favorite:

Another:

 

[Policar]

There's not much progress being made in scanners since everyone shoots digital these days. I've never used the V500, but my guess is that it should be more than sharp enough for scanning 8x10 prints, unless they're contact prints or something. The 4990 (I think that's the model number) from forever ago was pretty amazingly sharp. Gave great scans of 4x5 negatives. Epson's scanners are very good. If your photos are contact prints, get a drum scan of the negative, maybe, but otherwise you should be set.

For smaller (medium format) negatives I quite like the Nikon 9000, which is rather amazing, but it sounds like you're dealing mostly with prints. Not that it's worth much owning a film scanner. I'm selling off most of my medium format system this week. Makes me sad.

 

[Obsidian6]

I've been using the v500 for a little while and boy do I love it! I had to archive 100s of old family photos for everyone after my grandmother passed away. I've also started to archive some of my negatives and transparencies and it's been handling it pretty well too. I still haven't mastered film scanning with it, but I'm off to a good start so far.

For the price, honestly I doubt you'd find a better flatbed scanner.