Okay. I have decided to get a scanner that will scan film up to at least 4X5. My intended use is for posting some of my 35mm and LF images on the web, and general "playing around" with a digital darkroom. At present, I do not have any plans to print larger than 8X10. I already have an Epson Stylus Photo 870 printer that seems to do a decent job from my digital camera. The dedicated film scanners for film sizes up to 4X5 seem to be pretty expensive, so I'm thinking of a flatbed with transparency adapter. I'm hoping to get a decent machine for somewhere in the $1000 to $2000 price range (?). I am on a pc platform, running windows 98 and ME, and would prefer firewire or even USB over SCCSI conectivity.

I'd appreciate input from any of you that have already wrestled with these issues, so as to help me avoid making any big mistakes! Also, on the cheaper side, I've seen an HP 1200DPI flatbed with 4X5 trans adapter for under $500, and wonder if there are any opinions out there on this machine... Thanks in advance for taking the time to answer -- I really appreciate the caliber and quality of the participants in this forum!

Regards,

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), March 24, 2001

Answers

A scanner that you will find in many pro photographers digital darkrooms, as well as being one of the industry standards in the graphics trade is the Agfa Duo-Scan. It uses what is known as twin plate technology to do both reflection and tranmission scanning. This doesn't come cheap however, with the bottom line Duo-Scan 1200 being about $800 - $900 U.S. and going up from there, depending on scanning resolution. But the results are well worth it!! Almost all of the flatbed scanners that claim to do transmission scanning the light is relfected through the slide/neg, bounced off of the lid of the scanner, back through the slide/neg to the CCD array. Plays hell with your contrast as well as not being terribly sharp. Useless in fact for anything under medium format. But the Agfa uses a seperate system (a pull out drawer) for the slide/negs, and the light passes directly through to a seperate CCD array sepecifcally designed for transmission work. The beauty of this system is the ability to scan up to an 8X10 slide/neg, as well as the ability to use an adapter that allows you to put in strips of 35mm or medium format, scan them and have the scanner build seperate files for each. GREAT MACHINES!!

-- Bob Todrick (bobtodrick@yahoo.com), March 24, 2001.

Jack,

Check out the Minolta Dimage Scan Multi. It is a dedicated film scanner with 3 holders: 35mm negs,35mm slides, large format with masks for medium and large formats. I settled on it because of its flexibility. I purchased mine used and bought the new Multi II software from Minolta. I am extremely pleased with the results and the software is a pleasure to use. It can scan up to 2880 with any medium. Minolta also has refurbished ones that they sell at their company store in the range of about $1200.00

The interface with PS6 is excellent and the machine allows the use of any color space and monitor profile.

J-D

-- Jean-David Borges (jdborges@home.com), March 24, 2001.

I do a lot of this. Both film and other media. What I deal with is collection of scientific data. For technical reasons I have to use a flat bed. The one I have now is the most expensive HP [don't remember the cost]. It does a good job. My files can be on the large side; up to 150 megs each. My experience is that firewire works fine as does SCSI. USB is too slow to handle data transfer on these large files. I am using a G4 with ~1.5 gigs.

Art

-- Art (AKarr90975@aol.com), March 25, 2001.

"It can scan up to 2880 with any medium."

True 2880 resolution only with 35mm, larger formats use interpolated resolution up to 2880 I think is nearer the mark.

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), March 26, 2001.

How much scanning resolution would be needed in order to realize the full potential of, let's say the current 50mm Summicron? Or can this even be done within the limitations of the computer screen resolution? How much is enough, if we want optimum quality on maybe a 14 or 15 inch screen?

-- Bob Fleischman (RFXMAIL@prodigy.net), March 26, 2001.

Bob:

I am certainly no expert in the optics of these things. But I think that you are correct that the reproduction capacities [moniter (mine is 21 in) or printers] place a limit on how much resolution you need. My experience is that blank magnification becomes important long before you have approached the limits of said lens.

By the way, when scanning negatives or tranpar. on a flat bed, I use optical mirror reflectors above the film rather than the top of the scanner.

Art

-- Art (AKarr90975@aol.com), March 30, 2001.