Here's a couple shots done with Fuji FP-100C from my polaroid that I just scanned a couple days ago. Still learning how to shoot with this thing, having little in the way of manual controls sucks, but it's still fun to use.
Daniel Buck wrote:
For less grainy scans, if you are scanning B&W film you can try scanning it in color and using only the green channel, I've heard that results in a less grainy B&W image. In general though, I think if you scan higher resolution than you need, then down-size to your print resolution that will give you less grain than scanning at your print res. Also, take off any sharpening in the scan, and do the sharpening later so you have more control over it.
I use an Epson V700 and am pleased with the results. Grain shows when pixel peeping but prints are fine. However, if there is any unwanted grain I use Noise Ninja which works really well!
anthonygh wrote:
I use an Epson V700 and am pleased with the results. Grain shows when pixel peeping but prints are fine. However, if there is any unwanted grain I use Noise Ninja which works really well!
Do you have any suggestions for getting more sharpness out of the V700? Have you tried using the different risers? I'm really unimpressed with the lack of sharpness I get on my V700 scans.
What are you using to keep your film flat? The biggest issue with scanning on flatbeds is film flatness. I never got a decent 35mm negative scan out of the 4490 or 4870 until I started using ANR glass inserts to hold the film flat and I had similar issues with 120 when using the awful Epson holder.
I'm willing to buy glass inserts, but not willing to use any fluid for my scans. I'd rather just buy a coolscan or just pay for sometimes bad lab scans...
it may be because those tree shots are shot with very thin DOF, the lens may not be sharp at that aperture? the grain/noise seems to be pretty sharp, so I'm guessing it's probably not the scanner? (or maybe it is, and the image has been sharpened a whole lot?) When I scan, I turn off all the sharpening and noise reduction, if I want any of that I'll do it in photoshop.
Do you have any scans that are done both by the lab, and the same film scanned on your v700? That would be a good start to compare.
TWoK wrote:
I'm willing to buy glass inserts, but not willing to use any fluid for my scans. I'd rather just buy a coolscan or just pay for sometimes bad lab scans...
I use glass. fluid mounting is WAY more hassle than I'm willing to bother with for small format film.
How do you calibrate for height adjustment? Just dick with it until you get the sharpness you are looking for?
This is what I would need for 35mm right? http://www.betterscanning.com/scanning/insert35.html
I'd need 4 ideally to be able to work faster by scanning up to 24 exposures at a time. By the time I put $120 in glass for 35mm a a bit more for a 120 holder I'm going to be in the range where I should have just got a 9000 ED.
I need to state that I have not used this system, but have read a lot about it.
Each scanner will have a "sweet spot" for film height above the scanner glass. The idea behind this system is to calibrate that height to a specific measurement. The other benefit to these kinds of holders is that they do a better job of holding the film flat.
I looked into this with my 4870. I then did some scanning with a handmade film holder for my 6x17 camera with pretty good results. But for real high end work I choose to either rent a film scanner or pay for a drum scan.
But like most people I am shooting less and less film these days even though I have all kinds of film camera systems...
The 900O ED is a nice scanner. You do run into issues if you need to scan odd film sizes or panos. For a while there I was really into the 6x17. The files my cheap 4870 were really pretty good.
But a flatbed scanner is a "jack of all trades" kind of tool. Anyway you slice it you will not get the results of a dedicated film scanner or a high end Imacom etc. Some shooters will even buy used drum scanners which can be found cheaply these days. Some of these need specific computer hardware and are not economically repairable though.
Still flatbed scanners are very useful for what they are. They do a nice job for the web and small prints. Doing large exhibition prints really warrants better equipment though.
I only shoot 35mm and MF so I don't need to ever scan anything else. I got the V700 because I expected decent results for 1/4 the price of the 9000 ED.
