Film Scanners

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by snapplejack18, Apr 25, 2007.

  1. snapplejack18 macrumors newbie


    Apr 1, 2007
  2. jlcharles macrumors 6502

    Mar 30, 2006
    Wenonah, NJ
  3. maestrokev macrumors 6502a


    Apr 23, 2007
    I have the Canon 8400F as well. It's ok, but doesn't have the dynamic range as dedicated film scanners. How serious are you with photography and your images. If casual, then the scanner will be fine and very versatile.
  4. ChrisA macrumors G4

    Jan 5, 2006
    Redondo Beach, California
    It will do decent work, good enough for most people but you will go nuts tryig to use it for high volume work. That automatic re-touch stuff "ICE" was developed by Kodak and licensed to Canon, Epson and the others and it really works but it's slow. You will be luck to be able to scan a roll of film per hour. But for low volume work that does notrequire the best profesional quality these newer, higher end flat beds are not bad

    I tried to use one to scan my collection. Some of the images I scanned have better final quality than I can get with my Nikon D50. 35mm film can be very good and a flat bed with these specs can do a good capture. But the process was just to slow and my scanner will to four negative strips at once. So I'm sending my stuff out to a service
  5. giffut macrumors 6502

    Apr 28, 2003
    Try ...

    ... to get a used dedicated film scanner. They offer much more quality than any flatbed scanner could possibly deliver for 35mm negative/slide scans. I could recommend Minolta Dimage Scan Dual II, II or IV. They are cheaper than similar Nikon Collscans, but on parity in terms of output quality. They can scan four slides or six pieces negative stripes at once. A killer feature is an aditional APS adapter, by using which you can import the whole roll in one session.

    I myself use the Scan Dual II via USB 1 interface. It´s fast enough for me. I got it for US$ 130 one year ago via eBay. You don´t have the hardware scratch removal more expensive models give you, but you get very good quality scans in roughly 11 Megapixels (4032x2688). I do archive family history on negative and slide. I use 16Bit output at the highest resolution, which is important, if you plan to photoshop them at some point of time.

    If you archive old material, it is recommended to not use any manipulation on the scanned data beforehand anyways. Just digitally enhance them, when you need to do so. That´s my practice at least for now. Until I can afford a digital SLR going beyond 11 Megapixel including optics myself, I am going to stick with my analog stuff.
  6. Crawn2003 macrumors 6502

    Jul 8, 2005
    Santa Rosa, California

    I use the microtek i900 at my home studio.

    I really like this because not only does it have a bed to scan in whatever you want, it also have a dedicated scan area just for film! It comes with the holders for 35mm, 120mm, 4x5 film, and a separate glass for the same area for films that are "standard" sizes. This is great since this helps to eliminate Newton rings and sometimes noise.

    It also comes with Digital Ice software, Silverfast software, and countless others that I can't even go into!

    But there is a down side, the price. I found mine for around $450 and that's from I can't say enough that this is an amazing scanner. Great price for everything it can do.


Share This Page