On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 23:20:42 +0000 (trs80@btinternet.com) wrote:
> I'm pretty new to this list, but could do with advice. I'm looking for a
> film scanner that won't break the bank (aren't we all) and it's come down
> to the Acer Scanwit 2720 as it's a great price, BUT I like Nikon stuff, is
> the LS30 really a better scanner for the extra cash? I did fancy the
> Minolta Scandual2 but here in the UK it's a full 33% more expensive then it
> is in the US and that I object to..
>
> Anyway I'm strictly amateur, negative only and mostly black and white
> (Kodak tri-x and Ilford HP5) BTW I'm only being so mean and concentrating
> on price as I have to move house in a few months :-(
This last par is significant information! B&W silver-based films are very hard
to scan well due to a (usually) extreme range of image densities. Additionally
the pronounced grain structure of faster emulsions can and does frequently kick
off aliasing artefacts which result in apparently massively-enhanced grain.
I have grave reservations about recommending any of those scanners for this
use. IME Nikons are marginally worse due to their semi-collimated lightsource.
Really the only way to be sure of avoiding grain aliasing is to scan with a
device which has such high resolution that grain can be resolved cleanly, or at
such low res than none can be recorded. Defocussing the scanner can help.
Any scanner of ~2700ppi is likely to throw up fairly awful grain aliasing on
some of these films. The only current models which would be anything like a
safe buy are the Polaroid and Microtek 4000ppi scanners, and these will also
handle the extreme density range fairly well. However, I have seen /some/ grain
aliasing when scanning Delta Pro 400 and TMax 400 on a Pol4000, though not as
awful as 2700ppi units.
So not good news. It's hard to be sure, since so much depends on film
development - eg TMax films in TMax dev gives fairly mushy grain, whereas Delta
Pro 400 in LC29 is very sharp. If you do go for a 2700ppi unit, get it on
approval so you can exchange it if the results are unacceptable. And I suspect
that of the units you mention the Minolta is likely to work better than the
others. The primary advantage of the Nikon is probably ICE, which does not work
with silver-based films as silver is IR-opaque, the same as the dirt and flaws
which ICE seeks to eliminate as different from the actual image.
As a longer term workaround, the chromagenic B&W films XP2 and TMax400CN
produce none of these problems and scan very well. I happen to like TCN a lot -
it gives great print quality in the enlarger.
Regards
Tony Sleep
- Online portfolio & exhibit; + film scanner info &
comparisons
