Dedicated 35mm slide and negative scanner or flatbed

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by FocaIPoint, Dec 27, 2003.

  1. FocaIPoint

    FocaIPoint Guest

    I need list input and advise based on experience, skill and expertise. How's
    taht for a lead in?

    I'm about to tackle an incredible project. I have approxiamtely 20K 35mm
    slides and negatives spanning 30 countries over more than 40 years and about
    5K 2 x 2 and 6 x 7 of the same and a few hundred 4 x 5s of the same. The
    larger media date back to the 1920s.

    I'll be screening, scanning, manipulating images, restoring and saving to CDROM
    all of them and setting aside the *special* ones perhaps for commercial
    purposes. I'm not getting older and I had better get started before I run out
    of time.

    Question: Can I expect to get good service from an Epson 3200 scanner or do I
    really, really need a dedicated one for 35mm. I mean how crucial is it and
    rally how much better are the 35mm scans from a dedicated scanner vice the
    flatbed? The exceptional images will probably be set aside and drum scanned
    later.

    If $$$ were not an issue I would not be addressing this question to the list.
    I have two scanners but it is.

    Thanking the lsit once again.

    David N.
     
    FocaIPoint, Dec 27, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. FocaIPoint

    Tom Thackrey Guest

    film scanners take 60 sec or more to scan a slide, 20,000 slides is 14 days
    not counting loading the slides.

    flatbed scanners, like the 3200 can do more than one slide in a pass, but
    the quality is pretty low and you're still looking at 3 or 4 days

    I had a similar problem, scanning 400 slides. I ended up using a dslr with a
    macro lens, a copy stand and a light box. I made a matte board mask with a
    hole the size of a mounted slide and put it on the light box. I aligned the
    camera so that the slide nearly filled the viewfinder. With the camera on
    auto exposure, I simply photographed all the slides. Not counting setup, I
    did the 400 slides in less than 1.5 hours. I know I was much faster with the
    last 100 than the first. It's not a low cost option unless you already have
    the dslr and lens. As you suggest I did use a film scanner for the
    exceptional images.
     
    Tom Thackrey, Dec 27, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. FocaIPoint

    FocaIPoint Guest

    I had a similar problem, scanning 400 slides. I ended up using a dslr with a
    Interesting solution. thank you. I am new to digital and a Nikon D100 or
    similar is in my future as I have a slew of AI and AF Nikkors for my F4 but a
    D100 at last look was about US$1,000, and that is simply not a budget item at
    present. Were it, I'd get the two scanners, one for 35mm media and the 3200
    for all the rest.

    Time is really not an issue and I apologize for the typo that may have led to
    some confusion. I
    'm retired and these images ARE my life captured on film from the 1950s onward
    and of my family's from the 1920s on.

    Thanks again.

    David N.
     
    FocaIPoint, Dec 27, 2003
    #3
  4. FocaIPoint

    Tony Spadaro Guest

    Forget about flatbeds for serious work with 35mm film. You can however,
    use them for "contact" scans to use in databases, etc. I scan all my film
    with a Canoscan 9900F (up to 24 frames at a shot with me out of the room
    doing somethign more interesting than attending to a scanner) at fairly low
    res (800dpi, later reduced to 500 dpi) and use those scans for cataloging
    and making decisions before doing the final scans on a dedicated film
    scanner. The Minolta Scan Elite (I might have that name incomplete) is under
    1000 dollars and will do you great scans with ICE - which will save you
    hundreds of hours worth of re-touching. Use the right tool and it pays for
    itself.

    --
    http://www.chapelhillnoir.com
    home of The Camera-ist's Manifesto
    The Improved Links Pages are at
    http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/links/mlinks00.html
    A sample chapter from my novel "Haight-Ashbury" is at
    http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/writ/hait/hatitl.html
     
    Tony Spadaro, Dec 27, 2003
    #4
  5. With the emphasis on the "or more". My Nikon ls-2000 takes more than
    15 minutes to do a max-quality scan (it's the 16x multi-sampling that
    really runs it up).
    On the other hand, you can get a stack feeder to run piles of slides
    through an LS-2000 or LS-4000.
     
    David Dyer-Bennet, Dec 27, 2003
    #5
  6. FocaIPoint

    HRosita Guest

    Hi,

    I have the Minolta Dimage Scan elite 5400 and I must say it is superb.
    You can get it today for under $850 and it is worth every penny. I mostly scan
    at 2700 because I hardly ever print. What makes it so good is the ICE
    capability. While it takes a little longer to scan, it gives you a clean slide
    without dust, scratches and mildew spots that saves you hours or retouching.
    Rosita
     
    HRosita, Dec 27, 2003
    #6
  7. FocaIPoint

    FocaIPoint Guest

    have the Minolta Dimage Scan elite 5400 and I must say it is superb.
    Thanks all. Given the percentage of media I have is 90 % 35 mm, I probably
    will bit the bullet and get a 35 mm scanner.

    Now any otehr recommendations besides the one above?

    Now tell me the install and setup is nearly idiot proof and I'll be very
    happy... but be truthful please. Whatever I decide on will be ordered early on
    in the new year.

    The flatbed for the larger media will wait.

    Thanks again

    David N.
     
    FocaIPoint, Dec 27, 2003
    #7
  8. FocaIPoint

    Bob Salomon Guest

    Thanks all. Given the percentage of media I have is 90 % 35 mm, I probably
    will bit the bullet and get a 35 mm scanner.

    Now any otehr recommendations besides the one above?

    Now tell me the install and setup is nearly idiot proof and I'll be very
    happy... but be truthful please. Whatever I decide on will be ordered early
    on
    in the new year.

    The flatbed for the larger media will wait.

    Thanks again

    David N.[/QUOTE]

    The Braun SlideScan 3600 automatically scans up to 100 mounted slides in
    any slide mounts.
     
    Bob Salomon, Dec 27, 2003
    #8
  9. FocaIPoint

    HRosita Guest

    Hi,

    the 5400 is real easy to install, either Firewire or USB.

    If you have XP, connect the scanner first and then install the driver.
    If you have Win98se install the driver first and then connect the scanner.

    Have fun
    Rosita
     
    HRosita, Dec 27, 2003
    #9
  10. FocaIPoint

    J. A. Mc. Guest

    FWIW, unless you're prepared to buy one of the best 35mm film scanners (and
    having stated that you'll drum scan the best anyway) ... the 3200 should
    serve your purpose well. I have and use the 3200 and a Microtek film
    scanner. While I find the Microtek a bit sharper, it's also noisier! On
    8x10's they're about the same (except for the noise).

    Do NOT use auto settings on the 3200. DO get Vuescan, separate your slides
    and negatives by film type and age. You can then 'gang' scan the same
    types/age with one correction. DO be sure to test for blocked highlights as
    the histogram on the TWAIN doesn't alwyas show where the maximum highlight
    is. A bit of practice and you'll know how much leeway to allow.

    Be prepared for some BIG files! <G>
     
    J. A. Mc., Dec 27, 2003
    #10
  11. FocaIPoint

    Tony Spadaro Guest

    Tony Spadaro, Dec 28, 2003
    #11
  12. FocaIPoint

    Tony Spadaro Guest

    I will tell you that after installing about a dozen scanners over the
    years - it is fairly easy nowadays. It used to be hell, but my last 3 have
    all gone in an worked -- except the Epson 3200 which worked but made
    disasterous scans - after failing to interest the Epson tech support team I
    returned it.

    --
    http://www.chapelhillnoir.com
    home of The Camera-ist's Manifesto
    The Improved Links Pages are at
    http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/links/mlinks00.html
    A sample chapter from my novel "Haight-Ashbury" is at
    http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/writ/hait/hatitl.html
     
    Tony Spadaro, Dec 28, 2003
    #12
  13. FocaIPoint

    FocaIPoint Guest

    Be prepared for some BIG files! <G

    Ahhh. This I like. I'm back to bouncing around between a dedicated 35 mm
    scanner and the 3200. :)

    I don't mind the large files. they will be scanned into PS, burned to CD,
    copied back to PS manipulated, and various sizes scanned and burned back to the
    CD. I may have the lingo wrong but I hope you understand what I am talking
    about.

    Thanks again

    David N
     
    FocaIPoint, Dec 28, 2003
    #13
  14. FocaIPoint

    tatanka Guest

    First off, that's a HUGE project -- forget what anybody says about "14
    days."

    I'm doing the same thing (17,000 + and still going). This has taken a year
    and a half
    thus far, but it's not a full-time job. On a day dedicated to scanning, I
    can do 6-8
    36-exp rolls of 35mm color or 10-12 rolls of B&W.

    I use a Canon FS2710 film scanner for the 35mm stuff and an Epson 2450 for
    medium format. It takes me 3 hours to run a 15-exp roll of 120 6x4.5 film
    through the Epson (about 10 minutes per frame).

    You should be able to get good results from the flatbed scanner (I've never
    tried
    this with 35mm). I have found that using a flatbed scanner for film has
    problems,
    mostly because it is about impossible to keep things clean, so a lot of work
    is
    needed afterwards to clean up the image. Loading and positioning the film is
    also a pain.

    I can't recommend the Canon FS2710 these days because there are better
    choices (like the FS4000). The 2710 does an excellent job, but it's SCSI,
    so is a pain to connect. The 2450 flatbed works well too, but it's slow.

    If you have a lot of 35mm to do, you'll be much happier with a dedicated
    scanner.
    In fact, with 5K 6x7 images, I'd be looking for a dedicated film scanner
    that
    does both 35mm and medium format, such as one of the Minolta Scan Multi
    models (but, they ain't cheap!!).

    If you're on a budget, I'd start with a 35mm dedicated scanner. You may
    find
    that after 4-5,000 scans, the project doesn't seem so interesting. :(

    -x-
     
    tatanka, Dec 28, 2003
    #14
  15. FocaIPoint

    J. A. Mc. Guest

    Yep, pretty much what I do with my scans ... and digital photographs. All
    are saved in the original file format ... jpg for the camera and .psd or
    ..tif for the scans.

    All the raw scan (shots) go straight to a CD before any manipulating as a
    protection. They're also 'stored' on an active 120 GB external Maxtor HD.

    I usually make an full format 'master', an 8x10 prepared for printing, a
    full format .jpg, a web sized .jpg and a thumbnail. Each 'type' goes into
    it's own sub-directory. They then get burned to a 'file CD' along with a
    Gallery Page from ImageWalker in the root.

    I can then look at the Gallery and (say) go to the directory for the "8x10"
    if I want a print of a certain shot/scan.

    I did see that you now state (other post) that you're about 90% 35mm ... I'd
    taken it as that you have a more spread balance of differing formats. With
    that in mind - I'd head for the film scanner if you can afford it ... $850
    vs $350. IF not, you'll get good (not 'serious', as some say) results with
    the 3200.
     
    J. A. Mc., Dec 28, 2003
    #15
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.