|
thetzar posted:I just want to thank those in this thread that have turned me back on to VueScan. I had tried it out a couple years ago and it didn't make an impact on me. I just gave it another shot, and bought a copy after 5 minutes of seeing how much more awesome than SilverFast it is. Is it possible to use it sort of like FlexColor where you have a view of the input histogram with all the range that the scanner gives you, and manually toe it in for each RGB histogram? I never figured out how to do it with Silverfast and it was annoying
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2011 03:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 12:58 |
|
|
My Filk Mp3s posted:Is it possible to use it sort of like FlexColor where you have a view of the input histogram with all the range that the scanner gives you, and manually toe it in for each RGB histogram? I never figured out how to do it with Silverfast and it was annoying Not REALLY, that I've found. You've got color sliders and some manual controls, but I haven't seen a proper curves dialog. I've found the auto color adjustment better than on SilverFast, but still far form optimal. It is a bit easier for me to scan at higher bit dept in VueScan, though, and I've been making tweaks to color in Lightroom/Photoshop as required.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2011 03:57
|
|
|
thetzar posted:Not REALLY, that I've found. You've got color sliders and some manual controls, but I haven't seen a proper curves dialog. I've found the auto color adjustment better than on SilverFast, but still far form optimal. It is a bit easier for me to scan at higher bit dept in VueScan, though, and I've been making tweaks to color in Lightroom/Photoshop as required. Curves I don't really care about - I just try to get evenly-distributed histograms for each color channel with no 0 or 255 so editing in Photoshop is easier. It looks like it is capable of letting you manually set black and white points to do that, but I am unsure if it's for the combined RGB histogram or if you can do it for individual ones.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2011 22:54
|
|
|
My Filk Mp3s posted:Curves I don't really care about - I just try to get evenly-distributed histograms for each color channel with no 0 or 255 so editing in Photoshop is easier. It looks like it is capable of letting you manually set black and white points to do that, but I am unsure if it's for the combined RGB histogram or if you can do it for individual ones. Why not download the demo? It's full-featured, just leaves watermarks.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2011 02:09
|
|
|
I could do with a couple of pointers for my V500 if anyone can answer a couple of questions. 1. I am scanning at 6400dpi at the moment as this is apparently the optical resolution of the scanner. It seems fairly quick but should i be using less? 2. If i am doing black and white should i just pick 16bit greyscale? 3. I am no good with curves in photoshop so I've been letting it do autoexpose, am i losing anything by doing that? 4. What would be a good setting for unsharp mask in photoshop to roughly mimmick medium sharpening in the epson software? I was told that photoshop should do a better job. Thanks for any help with this.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2011 20:03
|
|
|
EvilRic posted:I could do with a couple of pointers for my V500 if anyone can answer a couple of questions. 2400 is generally where people think you start to experience diminishing returns. 6400 is bullshit, basically.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2011 21:26
|
|
|
EvilRic posted:I could do with a couple of pointers for my V500 if anyone can answer a couple of questions. 1. I generally do 3200dpi on my V500 because it's reasonably fast and easier on Lightroom (my computer is a couple years old). I'm fairly confident I'm not giving up much. The V700 tests at about 2300-2400 real DPI, and the V500 is similar. You might be able to gain a small amount of extra resolution and noise reduction by scanning at 4800 and resizing it back down to your intended resolution, but it's just a flatbed scan for web use, so  2. It makes smaller files than storing all three channels, for sure. Vuescan will let you choose a channel (R,G, or B) and it will use that as the grayscale channel. This could theoretically give a small boost in sharpness over averaging all three channels. I don't know which way Epson Scan does this internally. 3. If your pictures look like you want them to, it's not a problem. I mostly use Lightroom and don't really Photoshop, so these instructions may not transfer directly. Generally I do autoexpose, then set the highlights where I want with the exposure setting, tweak the contrast and gamma to get the shadows where I want, then play with all the settings to see if I can get it a bit better. 4. Sharpening really depends on the image/film/scan resolution/etc. You always want to sharpen as the last operation before export, so it's better to do it in Photoshop than in Epson Scan. It doesn't really matter much on web images, but for prints it'll take a couple tries to get the right amount. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 21:46 on Apr 19, 2011 |
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2011 21:38
|
|
|
http://www.amazon.com/Plustek-OpticFilm-7400-Film-Scanner/dp/B003G8OX2E/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1303249389&sr=1-1 I am extremely tempted to get this right now. Does anyone have experience with the Plustek OpticFilm 7400? Love it? Hate it?
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2011 22:43
|
|
|
ASSTASTIC posted:http://www.amazon.com/Plustek-OpticFilm-7400-Film-Scanner/dp/B003G8OX2E/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1303249389&sr=1-1 Hot Dog Day #20 fucked around with this message at 01:48 on Apr 20, 2011 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2011 01:40
|
|
Hot Dog Day #20 posted:I have an OpticFilm 7300, It just so happens that I recently acquired a 7300 from craigslist, and it's my first film scanner ever. So would you mind if I ask you a few questions: - Silverfast or Vuescan? *(I immediately disliked Silverfast and switched to Vuescan) - Scan settings that you use? *(Right now I've been scanning at 3600dpi, 2 passes, no "filters", color balance neutral or none, output 24 bit .DNG. I then take the .DNG through Lightroom for tweaking and finish up in Photoshop for any dust/scratches/whatever) -Any tips/tricks/nuances you've picked up in regard to this particular model? *(I've noticed that using multiexposure sometimes causes some slight color banding)
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2011 05:49
|
|
|
How long does it take to scan on thos plusteks? Im just waiting till I most likely buy the 7400
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2011 05:53
|
|
Fists Up posted:How long does it take to scan on thos plusteks? Im just waiting till I most likely buy the 7400
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2011 06:05
|
|
|
I need a 120 scanner, so my options are V500, V600 or 9000F. Everyone here seems to recommend the V series, and for $10 difference I'd get the V600 in case I ever want to go landscape or just bulk scan, but the problem is that we have to pay a get-bent-over-a-chair-tax on photo gear here in Aus, so the pricing works out at roughly: V600: $180+$140(s/h)+$55(240V power supply) = $375 from adorama, who are out of stock anyway and no warranty because bugger sending it back if it costs $140 local V600: $465 (seriously. US goons pay $180, we pay $465) local 9000F: $320+$15(s/h) = $335. Given that, is it worth the price/hassle to get a V600? The only possible up side is I want a paterson universal tank which costs $55 here or $20 at adorama (with stupidly expensive shipping - about $40) that could be bundled to reduce shipping prices to about $160 total Opinions? Have I overlooked any other good scanners in that price range?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2011 12:23
|
|
|
Captain Postal posted:I need a 120 scanner, so my options are V500, V600 or 9000F. Everyone here seems to recommend the V series, and for $10 difference I'd get the V600 in case I ever want to go landscape or just bulk scan, but the problem is that we have to pay a get-bent-over-a-chair-tax on photo gear here in Aus, so the pricing works out at roughly:
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2011 13:38
|
|
|
amazon doesn't like to ship anything other than books/dvds to here, and my grasp of Japanese is not good enough to look at other Japanese sites.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2011 14:22
|
|
|
Did you end up finding anything for cheap, Captain Postal? I'm struggling to find something decent and affordable here too.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2011 12:43
|
|
|
Anmitzcuaca posted:Did you end up finding anything for cheap, Captain Postal? I'm struggling to find something decent and affordable here too. Canoscan 8800F from gumtree for $150. Technology hasn't advanced that much in the past year, and 4800dpi vs 9600dpi of the 9000F (and I think the 9600 is just the stepping of the motor?) Good luck!
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2011 00:46
|
|
|
Captain Postal posted:Canoscan 8800F from gumtree for $150. Technology hasn't advanced that much in the past year, and 4800dpi vs 9600dpi of the 9000F (and I think the 9600 is just the stepping of the motor?) Neither of those flatbeds can resolve anything close to 4800dpi.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2011 00:48
|
|
|
We should really just have a big flashing alarm in the thread title that says  ANYTHING ADVERTISED OVER 3200 DPI IS BULLSHIT Even 3200 is kinda pushing it, the true optical resolution of most consumer scanners falls somewhere between 1500-2000DPI, a little higher for the really expensive ones like the V700-750.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2011 01:18
|
|
is go
|
At the opposite end of the scale from the V700 and such like, I have acquired an Epson Perfection 3170 for the princely sum of $20, plus $2.75 for a USB cable and a piece of cheap plate glass from the local dollar store. The seller literally pulled it out of a recycling bin to sell it to me, he was about an hour away from taking a load to the city's recycling facility. It's missing the negative holder, hence the plate glass to hold a strip of negatives against the platen. It was the only one for sale locally that could do medium format, and the reviews of this machine when it was new are very positive. So far, so good - I'm getting some Newton's Rings that I'm confident I can eliminate by fiddling with the placement or getting better glass, but otherwise it's performing about as well as can be expected.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2011 02:51
|
|
|
Well, the Newton's Rings are horrible. Other than ordering from betterscanning.com, does anyone have any suggestions for where I might find a good piece of glass? I have a feeling that if I walk into a glass-and-windows shop and ask about optical qualities they'll just give me funny looks. Perhaps I'm wrong about that?
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2011 01:58
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:Well, the Newton's Rings are horrible. Other than ordering from betterscanning.com, does anyone have any suggestions for where I might find a good piece of glass? I have a feeling that if I walk into a glass-and-windows shop and ask about optical qualities they'll just give me funny looks. Perhaps I'm wrong about that?
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2011 04:54
|
|
|
Anybody ever opened an Advantix (APS) film cartridge (APS) to scan yourself? I've got a bunch of APS I shot in highschool I'd like to try to scan.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2011 16:38
|
|
|
spf3million posted:Anybody ever opened an Advantix (APS) film cartridge (APS) to scan yourself? I've got a bunch of APS I shot in highschool I'd like to try to scan. I believe you didn't get the developed film back in the cartridge. Make sure you get the film developed before breaking open the cartridge, otherwise you're not getting any images and ruining any chance of ever doing so. Go to a photo lab and ask to have the film developed, no prints made (unless you want them) and confirm that you will be getting the negatives back as well.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2011 17:18
|
|
|
These are old cartridges which I've already developed with prints. They give the cartridge back with the film rewound. I'm assuming they have some sort of automated machine to unwind and rewind when printing. I want to take the film out of the cartridge to scan. Maybe I'll try to rewind it after scanning, not sure how it'll work out.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2011 17:29
|
|
|
Huh, I was confusing APS with 110 format. Sorry. Asking Google gives me this as the second link: http://www.camerahacker.com/extract_APS_film/index.php
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2011 18:07
|
|
|
Oh cool, thanks. Google and China haven't been getting along well lately.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2011 18:56
|
|
|
I decided to get an Epson V500, because scanning is expensive here, while developing is rather cheap (as was the V500). I was just wondering how cross processed negatives are handled? With regular negatives I imagine that the scanner software removes the orange mask and inverts the image, but I'm not sure what cross processed negatives work.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2011 22:17
|
|
|
Most scanner software, including EpsonScan, will let you turn off pretty much all of the automatic image-processing functions. The easiest thing to do might be to scan in full manual mode (no processing at all), and then mess with the images in Lightroom or Photoshop or whatever to get the look you want.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2011 23:45
|
|
|
FLX posted:I decided to get an Epson V500, because scanning is expensive here, while developing is rather cheap (as was the V500). I was just wondering how cross processed negatives are handled? With regular negatives I imagine that the scanner software removes the orange mask and inverts the image, but I'm not sure what cross processed negatives work. Turn auto stuff off, scan as a positive image, but move the level sliders in from each side until the histogram looks roughly right. Invert in photoshop.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2011 03:32
|
|
|
Can we talk film scanning workflow for a minute here? Do you guys do a low-res scan and decide which photos are keepers and immediately selectively high-res scan them? My preference is to get low res scans of everything and go back through them later to finalize them. This is much like the way I would edit digital photos. It's a pain though because that way I will have to go back and find the frames I want and reload them into the film strip holder etc. What works for you?
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2011 01:50
|
|
|
The V500 arrived today and I'm really satisfied with its results. I only have old/toy analog cameras, so I can't say much about its sharpness though. I'm using Lomography Digitaliza film holders, which are awesome, compared to the ones that came with the scanner. The Epson Scan app offers enough features to get nice, flat, positive images onto the computer and into Photoshop for final color grading. I especially like the feature that lets me select pictures in the scanner preview individually, apply some color correction to each of them and then scan each selection to its own file. My workflow so far has been to preview my photographs in Epson Scan (there is a preview zoom feature too) and choose which images to scan there. How do you store your cut up negatives by the way? Especially the medium format ones.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2011 20:45
|
|
|
Mine negative strips are sitting in gallon ziploc bags until I get some binder sheets.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2011 21:10
|
|
|
I store my MF negatives in archival plastic sleeves placed into paper envelopes with relevant information (date taken, location, any special notes about processing) and placed into a photo box. Not the most efficient, but it's cheap and quick to look things up by date if you place them in the box chronologically.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2011 22:34
|
|
|
FLX posted:How do you store your cut up negatives by the way? Especially the medium format ones. Negative holders and those sheets in a binder
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2011 23:51
|
|
|
Ferris Bueller posted:Negative holders and those sheets in a binder MrBlandAverage posted:Go to a framing shop and ask for a sheet of anti-reflective glass slightly smaller than your scanner's platen.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2011 02:00
|
|
|
I have several rolls' worth of 35mm negatives from my time in the Navy, and I'd like to convert them into digital format. I know everyone loves the Epson Vx00 series of scanners, but I really don't want or need another flatbed (I have a Canon MX870 all-in-one). All of the pictures were taken with a Minolta point-n-shoot camera, so they're the 90s equivalent of cell phone FaceBook pics. Are these any good for that?
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2011 04:34
|
|
|
Mad Dragon posted:I have several rolls' worth of 35mm negatives from my time in the Navy, and I'd like to convert them into digital format. I know everyone loves the Epson Vx00 series of scanners, but I really don't want or need another flatbed (I have a Canon MX870 all-in-one). All of the pictures were taken with a Minolta point-n-shoot camera, so they're the 90s equivalent of cell phone FaceBook pics. Are these any good for that? Doubtful. Most of those are really terrible quality. Your MX870 is not a negative scanner, so it's not really redundant to get a photo flatbed. Nothing else in that price range will deliver equivalent quality to a V500 or a CanoScan 9900F. If you really want a negative-only scanner you could look for a (probably SCSI) Minolta ScanDual or Polaroid SprintScan but these won't have infrared dust/scratch removal (nor will that one you linked), plus they're more difficult to work with. It's also not like the pictures being from a point and shoot matters. You're taking a picture of a picture. Sure, the result won't be as good if the original negative isn't super sharp. But you can introduce an awful lot of softness in the scan, too, if the scanner sucks. Maximize what you have by buying the right tool before those negatives fade.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2011 04:54
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Nothing else in that price range will deliver equivalent quality to a V500 or a CanoScan 9900F.  ) for one of those to restock on Amazon?
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2011 14:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 12:58 |
|
|
I'm looking at getting an Epson V600, it's $20 more than the V500. The goal is to scan 35mm and 120 bw. Should I go ahead and order those better scanning holders? I'm planning on buying everything from Freestyle photo. Chemicals, scanner, film. Oh dear God I'm going to be more broke. Why is shooting MF so much drat fun?
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2011 01:59
|
|
