Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

   


   


   















      :: Filmscanners
Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: filmscanners: Scanning 4x5 under $500 US?



>Not this question again!  But scanners are coming way down in price, their
>resolution is going up, and now 12, 14, and even 16 bits per color are
>readily available.  I have some 20 year old 4x5s (B&W, negative, and slide)
>that I would like to play with again - I haven't worked with them or done
>any large format since I no longer have my own darkroom.
>
>I am in the market for a flatbed scanner that can do  reasonable job with 4
>by 5 film.  I figure 1200 dpi is good enough for what I want, although I
>have nothing against 1600 or 2400 dpi.  ;-)  My main concern with any
>flatbed scanner is the noise, particularly in slide shadows.  The scanners I
>am considering are:
>
>Epson Perfection 1640SU Photo  -  $299, USB & SCSI, 1600 dpi
>Microtek ScanMaker 5700 - $332, Firewire, 1200 dpi
>HP ScanJet 7400C - $440, SCSI and USB, 2400 dpi
>Canon Canoscan D2400F - $467, USB, 2400 dpi
>Agfa - no longer makes consumer scanners
>
>My questions about these scanners are:
>
>1) Has anybody compared the noise or image quality of these scanners.  I
>would really like information where someone has tested at least two of these
>scanners, using either slides or negatives, and can state that scanner A is
>better than scanner B for the following reason...
>
>2) Can anybody verify that these scanners work with VueScan, particularly on
>the Mac, either OS 9 or X?  It looks like the HP and Epson run under VueScan
>but that the Microtek and Canon will not.
>
>3) Are the outputs of the HP and Epson limited to sRGB?  I have been lead to
>believe that this is the case with their consumer scanners.
>
>4) Do all except the Microtek "fake" their high resolution by either
>microstepping a single CCD or using a pair of CCDs?  I don't think any are
>using CCDs with more than 10,400 elements.
>
>5) The Canon features FARE (similar to ICE).  Does it require one scan or
>two in order to read the IR image?  I am concerned about image registration
>problems.
>
>6) Is the output of the HP 16 bits or is it only capable of outputting 8
>bits per color?  With HP's software and with VueScan?
>
>7) Any hidden gottchas?  Like no exposure control, crappie software, etc.
>
>8) How much would I gain by going up to $1000?  I am thinking here of the
>Epson 1680 or the Microtek 8700.
>
>--------
>Dean Shough
>dean.shough@lmco.com



MacWorld tested some of these scanners a few months ago.  You can 
check online or at the library if you want to see the test photos. 
They did not like the Epson. It was not as sharp as the "lower 
resolution" Canon 1200 model and it had a color "bloom" that spilled 
red into areas next to edges in the photo. They liked the Agfa e50 
and the Canon 1200 the best. They were testing them for print 
scanning. They were not impressed with the transparency options of 
any of them.
-- 
Winsor Crosby
Long Beach, California




 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.