Hello:

I'm a film buff. I've not yet strayed into digital.

But, I'm about to--but only for a limited purpose.

I'm using my Leica for a black and white project (negative film, not Scalia) which involves shooting environmental portraits in some very sketchy neighborhoods. Many of the people have asked that I return with images.

I don't want to take the time needed to do quality prints. I have access, however, to a friend's Olympus P-200 printer which prints 3x4" black and white prints quickly, conveniently and relatively inexpensively.

My question: What scanner should I buy? Obviously, I want one that will enable me to scan directly from a black and white negative; then, I may wish to crop the image slightly on my laptop so as to achieve a 3x4 ratio; finally, I will print and deliver the image.

Obviously, I don't need a top-of-the line scanner to achieve my goal. I need one that will provide nice prints that the subjects will enjoy.

One person recommended the Minolta Dual Scan II. What do you suggest?

I'd appreciate any input you can give. Thanks in advance for your help.

-- Irving Greines (Papyg@aol.com), March 27, 2002

Answers

My experience has been that with lower end scanners, using a flatbed and scanning from prints give better results that scanning from negatives. This might be somthing you want to consider. Brand wise, I've been very happy with my Epson Perfection 1250. I'm sure it's good enought for 3x4 prints and it's really cheap!

-- sunil (yatsunil@hotmail.com), March 27, 2002.

If you have much darkroom experience at all, you can probably do a set of decent RC prints much more quickly (and cheaply) than you can scan the negatives, do the appropriate manipulations in PhotoShop, and make prints.

-- Mike Dixon (mike@mikedixonphotography.com), March 27, 2002.

If you want quick and dirty, inexpensive Epson flatbeds are the way to go. You'll be able to get a notch above drugstore-quality prints if that's what you're looking for. Anything better than that your mileage may vary depending on your darkroom skills-- yes, RC prints might be more efficient for you.

Have you considered processing your negatives at a lab that has Fuji Frontier machines? Most of them run off a set of 4x6 prints when you develop, the prints are quite nice, and it's probably cheaper than the media cost of a Olympus P-200 print. Not sure if you'd be limited to XP2 or TCN400 but it's worth looking into. Process your stuff and get prints back for your subjects-- kill two birds with one stone, and leave more time for shooting.

-- JM Woo (wooismyid@delethis.yahoo.com), March 27, 2002.

Another scanner I've heard good things about is the Minolta Dimage Scan Elite II. It'll cost more than the Dual Scan II($659 at B&H), but has Digital Ice (not useful for B&W unless it's a C41 type), Firewire & comes with Photoshop Elements software. This is the scanner I'm thinking of getting for archiving my negatives.

-- Ken Prager (pragerproperties@worldnet.att.net), March 27, 2002.

I forgot to mention that the Scan Elite II also has improved bit depth and Dmax than the Dual Scan II, but it does cost about $300 more.

-- Ken Prager (pragerproperties@worldnet.att.net), March 27, 2002.

You should be able to pick up a used Polaroid 35, 35LE or 35Plus for a song. These were discontinued when the 4000 came out.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), March 28, 2002.

Hi Irving! Haven't heard from you in awhile. Nice to hear you are still shooting away.

In answer to your specific question. In the April 2002 Shutterbug, Bob Shell has a review of the Pacific Image PrimeFilm 1800 Silver Scanner, which is a new scanner that sells for $260 at B and H. Bob was pretty impressed with the scanner's capabilities. It certainly would fulfill your requirements. A scanner is only as good as its software, and this scanner comes bundled with Silverfast LE software which is excellent. Bob does not comment in the review on the results with black and white film, but if you email me I will forward Bob's email address to you and you can ask him whatever you like about the scanner.

Personally, I think that it would be cheaper and easier to have machine black and white 3 1/2 x 5 prints made to give to those folks. My black and white lab makes machine prints on black and white paper for around 30 cents apiece. It will cost you much more than that for the Olympus paper and ribbon plus you have to spend the time scanning the negatives. I bet the Olympus media will cost nearly $1/print. On the other hand, if you have any other need for scans (such as posting to a website) or just want to stick you toe into the digital water this would be an inexpensive way to go about it.

-- Steve Rosenblum (stevierose@yahoo.com), March 28, 2002.

I use a Acer (now Benq) scanwit 2470. It is a little marvel as it cost the same as the minolta dual scan but provides digital ICE.

I use it to make 1/4 A4 prints to analyze the pictures and do not do any fancy editing. I leave that for the darkroom. It saves a lot of work and prints that in the end turn out bad after all because on the contact sheet you didn't see the disturbing detail.

Reinier

-- ReinierV (rvlaam@xs4all.nl), March 28, 2002.