Film and Transparency scanners

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by petercharlesfagg, Dec 11, 2008.

  1. I apologise if this is in the wrong group but I have a question that I
    hope those involved with digital photography can answer.

    My wife and I (over 60) both still use film cameras but we have many
    hundreds of negatives and transparencies that are deteriorating and we
    would like to scan them into our PC and eventually get them
    transferred to disc or some other form of storage.

    Our question is this: In the Daily Telegraph last Tuesday there is an
    offer for a scanning system made by Zennox and it is claimed to be
    capable of scanning negatives and slides at the touch of a button.

    The information given states that it is a 5-mega pixel CMOS sensor
    with 3,600 dpi interpolation and 48 bit colour scan and has features
    such as High resolution images with automatic exposure control, fixed
    focus and colour balance. (Most of this means virtually nothing to
    us!)


    It is for purchase at £79.99 which appears reasonable.


    Would this be a good investment or are there better machines out there
    within £100.00?

    Any advice would be appreciated, Peter.
    petercharlesfagg, Dec 11, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. petercharlesfagg

    Jim Guest

    What types of film and how old? By type, I mean name such as Ektrachrome
    E2, Kodacolor-X, Kodachrome II, etc. Are any of them subject to the
    infamous colour shift?
    If there are very many that have the colour shift problem, then scans from
    this unit will require intensive post processing.
    I am not a fan of interpolated resolution.
    You could view your situation as a minimum cost to determine whether you can
    recover the images to your satisfaction. Personally, though, I would keep
    looking.
    Jim
    "petercharlesfagg" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    I apologise if this is in the wrong group but I have a question that I
    hope those involved with digital photography can answer.

    My wife and I (over 60) both still use film cameras but we have many
    hundreds of negatives and transparencies that are deteriorating and we
    would like to scan them into our PC and eventually get them
    transferred to disc or some other form of storage.

    Our question is this: In the Daily Telegraph last Tuesday there is an
    offer for a scanning system made by Zennox and it is claimed to be
    capable of scanning negatives and slides at the touch of a button.

    The information given states that it is a 5-mega pixel CMOS sensor
    with 3,600 dpi interpolation and 48 bit colour scan and has features
    such as High resolution images with automatic exposure control, fixed
    focus and colour balance. (Most of this means virtually nothing to
    us!)


    It is for purchase at £79.99 which appears reasonable.


    Would this be a good investment or are there better machines out there
    within £100.00?

    Any advice would be appreciated, Peter.
    Jim, Dec 11, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. petercharlesfagg

    ray Guest

    On Thu, 11 Dec 2008 13:49:46 -0800, petercharlesfagg wrote:

    > I apologise if this is in the wrong group but I have a question that I
    > hope those involved with digital photography can answer.
    >
    > My wife and I (over 60) both still use film cameras but we have many
    > hundreds of negatives and transparencies that are deteriorating and we
    > would like to scan them into our PC and eventually get them transferred
    > to disc or some other form of storage.
    >
    > Our question is this: In the Daily Telegraph last Tuesday there is an
    > offer for a scanning system made by Zennox and it is claimed to be
    > capable of scanning negatives and slides at the touch of a button.
    >
    > The information given states that it is a 5-mega pixel CMOS sensor with
    > 3,600 dpi interpolation and 48 bit colour scan and has features such as
    > High resolution images with automatic exposure control, fixed focus and
    > colour balance. (Most of this means virtually nothing to us!)


    And for good reason. It means virtually nothing. Most scanners I'm
    familiar with do not have a fixed sensor as in a digital camera, they
    instead have a linear array which travels along via the aid of a stepping
    motor to scan the negative.

    >
    >
    > It is for purchase at £79.99 which appears reasonable.
    >
    >
    > Would this be a good investment or are there better machines out there
    > within £100.00?


    You're probably be better off, IMHO, with an inexpensive flatbed scanner
    capable of handling slides and negatives. I've found very good units like
    that at the Epson online store for under $100 (refurb).

    You might also consider that scanning negatives and slides is a time
    consuming process. If you want to scan several hundred, I'd recommend you
    price having it done for you.


    >
    > Any advice would be appreciated, Peter.
    ray, Dec 11, 2008
    #3
  4. petercharlesfagg

    Mark Roberts Guest

    petercharlesfagg wrote:

    >Our question is this: In the Daily Telegraph last Tuesday there is an
    >offer for a scanning system made by Zennox and it is claimed to be
    >capable of scanning negatives and slides at the touch of a button.
    >
    >The information given states that it is a 5-mega pixel CMOS sensor
    >with 3,600 dpi interpolation and 48 bit colour scan and has features
    >such as High resolution images with automatic exposure control, fixed
    >focus and colour balance. (Most of this means virtually nothing to
    >us!)
    >
    >It is for purchase at £79.99 which appears reasonable.
    >
    >
    >Would this be a good investment or are there better machines out there
    >within £100.00?
    >
    >Any advice would be appreciated, Peter.


    The scanner you mention is sold under a variety of names. (I don't
    know who makes it.) I do know that it only scans at 1829 dpi, which is
    insufficient for all but the smallest prints (say, 4 x 6 inches). When
    they say "3,600 dpi interpolation" they mean that it interpolates from
    its true resolution (1829) up to 3600, which is really of no benefit.

    I think it's poor value even at the price you mention. You would
    probably be much better off looking for a second hand film scanner of
    higher quality (and still stay under £100.00)



    --
    Mark Roberts Photography & Multimedia
    www.robertstech.com
    Mark Roberts, Dec 11, 2008
    #4
  5. petercharlesfagg wrote:
    []
    > The information given states that it is a 5-mega pixel CMOS sensor
    > with 3,600 dpi interpolation and 48 bit colour scan and has features
    > such as High resolution images with automatic exposure control, fixed
    > focus and colour balance. (Most of this means virtually nothing to
    > us!)
    >
    >
    > It is for purchase at £79.99 which appears reasonable.


    Peter,

    I've seen the results from a similar "scanner" just recently, and it would
    be at the very bottom end of the quality range I would accept. The
    advantage is that it's quick, as the whole image is made at once, whereas
    conventional scanners use a line sensor (not an area one), and have to
    scan the image by moving the film slowly across the sensor.

    This is the unit I saw:
    http://www.novatech.co.uk/novatech/specpage.html?VEH-VFS004

    If all you want is "holiday snap" quality it would possibly do, but if you
    care about the quality you may want to go for a more expensive, and
    slower, scanner.

    Cheers,
    David
    David J Taylor, Dec 12, 2008
    #5
  6. petercharlesfagg

    Don Stauffer Guest

    ray wrote:

    >
    > And for good reason. It means virtually nothing. Most scanners I'm
    > familiar with do not have a fixed sensor as in a digital camera, they
    > instead have a linear array which travels along via the aid of a stepping
    > motor to scan the negative.


    No, I have seen this. It is a 2D imaging chip- same as in cameras, with
    a fixed focus lens. The advantage of it is its convenience and ease of use.

    Several years ago 5 Mp would be considered okay. Now, maybe not in
    these days of 10 Mp cheap P&S cams.

    However, for the price it is okay- cheaper than most flatbed scanners
    that do negs and slides.

    Will it get all of the data on your films? Depends on the film you
    used, the quality of the camera you used, etc. Also, the quality you
    need is dependent on what you will do with the results. If you intend
    large prints, maybe it is better to go with a more expensive scanner. If
    you just want them to keep in a computer or digital picture frame, or to
    do 4 x 6 prints, that unit is probably fine. It certainly will make
    digital files to save your heritage.
    Don Stauffer, Dec 12, 2008
    #6
  7. petercharlesfagg

    ray Guest

    On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 09:09:54 -0600, Don Stauffer wrote:

    > ray wrote:
    >
    >
    >> And for good reason. It means virtually nothing. Most scanners I'm
    >> familiar with do not have a fixed sensor as in a digital camera, they
    >> instead have a linear array which travels along via the aid of a
    >> stepping motor to scan the negative.

    >
    > No, I have seen this. It is a 2D imaging chip- same as in cameras, with
    > a fixed focus lens. The advantage of it is its convenience and ease of
    > use.


    Thanks for the info. How are they speed wise?

    >
    > Several years ago 5 Mp would be considered okay. Now, maybe not in
    > these days of 10 Mp cheap P&S cams.
    >
    > However, for the price it is okay- cheaper than most flatbed scanners
    > that do negs and slides.


    I've found several refurbished models at the Epson online store that are
    under $100 and do negatives and slides.

    >
    > Will it get all of the data on your films? Depends on the film you
    > used, the quality of the camera you used, etc. Also, the quality you
    > need is dependent on what you will do with the results. If you intend
    > large prints, maybe it is better to go with a more expensive scanner. If
    > you just want them to keep in a computer or digital picture frame, or to
    > do 4 x 6 prints, that unit is probably fine. It certainly will make
    > digital files to save your heritage.
    ray, Dec 12, 2008
    #7
  8. My thanks to all who have responded I appreciate your taking the time.

    In answer to some of the questions.

    Since I was 11 years old I have used mostly B&W film because of my
    colourblindness in the Red/Green section of the spectrum. For more
    years than I care to remember Ilford FP4 was my film of choice, then
    Kodak Gold 100, transparency wise it was Ektachrome for me because I
    could process the film in the bath, my wife preferred Kodak Slide
    (Kodachrome) film which she sent away for processing. In later years
    I have been using Ilford XP2 400asa because it can be processed on the
    high street!

    Many of the transparencies are fading and gremlins are eating some of
    the surface away!

    Anyway, all of the negatives and slides really need to be archived in
    one form or another hence the original question!

    If I take all of this onboard perhaps it would be better to pursue a
    package of a Nikon Coolscan (I have used their equipment for years),
    your further thoughts would be appreciated.

    Regards, Peter.
    petercharlesfagg, Dec 12, 2008
    #8
  9. My apologies, a neighbour suggested the Nikon Coolscan and I have just
    checked the prices!

    They are way outside our budget, please ignore my statement.

    Peter.
    petercharlesfagg, Dec 12, 2008
    #9
  10. petercharlesfagg

    Jim Guest

    "petercharlesfagg" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > My apologies, a neighbour suggested the Nikon Coolscan and I have just
    > checked the prices!
    >
    > They are way outside our budget, please ignore my statement.
    >
    > Peter.

    Yes, they are expensive. But, they are quite capable of recovering your
    faded images.

    You can partially restore such images with variable results by processing in
    one of the many photo editing programs.
    The results tend to be quite variable, at least for me.

    Jim
    Jim, Dec 12, 2008
    #10
  11. petercharlesfagg

    Don Stauffer Guest

    ray wrote:
    > On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 09:09:54 -0600, Don Stauffer wrote:
    >
    >> ray wrote:
    >>

    >
    > Thanks for the info. How are they speed wise?

    Undoubtedly faster than setting up a transparency cover and template on
    a flatbed
    >
    > I've found several refurbished models at the Epson online store that are
    > under $100 and do negatives and slides.
    >


    I bought a flatbed with a transparency adapter for seventy something,
    about the same price as those gadgets, but of course far more flexible.
    I would expect the quality is a bit better, but the convenience of the
    gadget is fine. It takes some physical time to set the transparency
    adapter up, and then more time to get into the driver and set it from
    print scanning to transparency scanning.
    Don Stauffer, Dec 13, 2008
    #11
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Nate Apkon

    film scanners

    Nate Apkon, Jul 28, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    330
    Bart van der Wolf
    Jul 28, 2003
  2. Melvyn Kopstein

    coolscan 4000 & new film scanners

    Melvyn Kopstein, Aug 16, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    318
    Melvyn Kopstein
    Aug 16, 2003
  3. Wayne

    Nikon film scanners 2900dpi vs 4000dpi

    Wayne, Aug 30, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    758
    Rafe B.
    Aug 31, 2003
  4. Glen A Stromquist

    film/slide scanners and older HP flatbeds

    Glen A Stromquist, Jan 20, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    320
    Robert Feinman
    Jan 21, 2004
  5. Replies:
    12
    Views:
    556
    Stewy
    Apr 14, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page