Velocity Reviews

Velocity Reviews (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/index.php)
-   Digital Photography (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/f37-digital-photography.html)
-   -   Re: flatbed scanner advice (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/t955100-re-flatbed-scanner-advice.html)

Sandman 12-04-2012 08:28 AM

Re: flatbed scanner advice
 
In article <V5Sts.91266$O62.25319@fed01.iad>,
"Michael D. Berger" <m_d_berger_1900@yahoo.com> wrote:

> I need a scanner primarily for old photos, but also for general
> paperwork. I am thinking of an Epson 700. Any suggestions?


The V700 or V750 (which I am using) is *excellent*.




--
Sandman[.net]

Nick Fotis 12-04-2012 09:11 PM

Re: flatbed scanner advice
 
On 04/12/2012 10:28, Sandman wrote:
> In article<V5Sts.91266$O62.25319@fed01.iad>,
> "Michael D. Berger"<m_d_berger_1900@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> I need a scanner primarily for old photos, but also for general
>> paperwork. I am thinking of an Epson 700. Any suggestions?

>
> The V700 or V750 (which I am using) is *excellent*.


Personally, I own a V500 (a middle-range model), which has scanned all
kinds of films, photos and paperwork.

I used it on XP computers, don't know how well it works on other
operating systems (but I suspect it works pretty well - I remember their
CDs had versions for XP/Vista and MacOS).

If you are using a platform like Windows 7 or Linux or the latest OSX,
you might want to check at their site for drivers etc.

Personally, I am pretty happy with my V500. Scanned thousands of photos
in the last 4 years with it, and it's still working nicely.

The V700 is overkill, needed only if you scan large format
negatives/slides in quantity.
For typical printed photos, the V500 (or V600) is more than enough.

For film scanning, estimate the V500 to scan at 2400 DPI with good
quality, and the V700 at 3200 DPI.

Cheers,
N.F.

Nick Fotis 12-05-2012 07:55 PM

Re: flatbed scanner advice
 
On 05/12/2012 00:23, David Dyer-Bennet wrote:

>> For film scanning, estimate the V500 to scan at 2400 DPI with good
>> quality, and the V700 at 3200 DPI.

>
> Less DMAX than film scanners, so trouble for intense slides. Does
> decently for negatives unless they're REALLY dense. With the film
> holders may hold 35mm negatives as flat as the film scanner does, too,
> which has been the big problem getting good scans on most flatbeds.


Personally, I have scanned 35mm slides and printed these in glossy
magazines without any apparent quality problems (half-page prints, but I
suspect the quality would be pretty good in full-page prints)

Also, note that I use the metal film holders from www.betterscanning.com
- these include anti-Newton glasses and keep very flat the film.

N.F.

Rob 12-05-2012 11:59 PM

Re: flatbed scanner advice
 
On 6/12/2012 6:55 AM, Nick Fotis wrote:
> On 05/12/2012 00:23, David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
>
>>> For film scanning, estimate the V500 to scan at 2400 DPI with good
>>> quality, and the V700 at 3200 DPI.

>>
>> Less DMAX than film scanners, so trouble for intense slides. Does
>> decently for negatives unless they're REALLY dense. With the film
>> holders may hold 35mm negatives as flat as the film scanner does, too,
>> which has been the big problem getting good scans on most flatbeds.

>
> Personally, I have scanned 35mm slides and printed these in glossy
> magazines without any apparent quality problems (half-page prints, but I
> suspect the quality would be pretty good in full-page prints)
>
> Also, note that I use the metal film holders from www.betterscanning.com
> - these include anti-Newton glasses and keep very flat the film.
>
> N.F.


I don't think that you need all the Dmax that film scanners offer for
scanning to print media, blacks block up.

Rob 12-06-2012 09:46 PM

Re: flatbed scanner advice
 
On 7/12/2012 6:46 AM, David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
> Rob <mesamine@google.com> writes:
>
>> On 6/12/2012 6:55 AM, Nick Fotis wrote:
>>> On 05/12/2012 00:23, David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
>>>
>>>>> For film scanning, estimate the V500 to scan at 2400 DPI with good
>>>>> quality, and the V700 at 3200 DPI.
>>>>
>>>> Less DMAX than film scanners, so trouble for intense slides. Does
>>>> decently for negatives unless they're REALLY dense. With the film
>>>> holders may hold 35mm negatives as flat as the film scanner does, too,
>>>> which has been the big problem getting good scans on most flatbeds.
>>>
>>> Personally, I have scanned 35mm slides and printed these in glossy
>>> magazines without any apparent quality problems (half-page prints, but I
>>> suspect the quality would be pretty good in full-page prints)
>>>
>>> Also, note that I use the metal film holders from www.betterscanning.com
>>> - these include anti-Newton glasses and keep very flat the film.

>>
>> I don't think that you need all the Dmax that film scanners offer for
>> scanning to print media, blacks block up.

>
> I don't understand; what do you mean "scannin to print media"? Do you
> mean scanning *from* print media? If so, then yeah, you don't need the
> exposure range, because the media doesn't give you that much range.
>



Making a scan for the printing industry to use. Magazines and
newspapers. You can't have black blacks they block up when printed.

Nick Fotis 12-08-2012 07:15 PM

Re: flatbed scanner advice
 
On 06/12/2012 21:45, David Dyer-Bennet wrote:

> I had to resort to a drum scan (from a lab; I don't have that level
> equipment!) but I've got a 24x36 print from 35mm tri-x up on my wall
> that looks wonderful. So magazine page size is really pretty small.


I suppose that you mean 24x36 inches, right?
Because our magazine has nearly the same size (in centimeters).
I feel that scanning with the V700 would approach very much the drum
scans (I am not a specialist in the latter, though).

> Flatness helps (or, more to the point, lots of equipment doesn't give
> very good flatness, so equipment that does is useful).


Note also that the metal mounts are less irritating to use, compared to
the plastic ones by Epson
(of course, even the plastic mounts from Epson are wonderful compared
with other companies).
Personally, I had the worst experience regarding usability with cheap HP
scanners which offered film scanning more as an afterthought.

> You know what else helps? Fluid ("wet") mounting. See
> <scanscience.com>. I'm just starting to work with it, but the
> improvement really is very much like the examples they show on their
> site. (For when you need the VERY best scan, of course; often you
> don't.)


I don't use wet mount, because (sooner or later) you will end up with
fluids inside your scanner (especially your platen glass).
And it is not easy to repair a scanner with that problem, as far as I know.

In general, I do not feel it's worth the bother and the mess to play
with wet mount.
Note that I am working extensively after the scan with the photos,
retouching scratches and fungus damage (many of these are more than half
a century old).

N.F.

Anthony Polson 12-08-2012 09:51 PM

Re: flatbed scanner advice
 
Nick Fotis <nick.fotis@gmail.com> wrote:
>I don't use wet mount, because (sooner or later) you will end up with
>fluids inside your scanner (especially your platen glass).
>And it is not easy to repair a scanner with that problem, as far as I know.
>
>In general, I do not feel it's worth the bother and the mess to play
>with wet mount.
>Note that I am working extensively after the scan with the photos,
>retouching scratches and fungus damage (many of these are more than half
>a century old).



The main reason for using wet mount is to avoid Newton's rings which
are very difficult to get rid of in post processing.



All times are GMT. The time now is 07:11 PM.

Powered by vBulletin®. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2010, Crawlability, Inc.