Epson V600 or a new camera for scanning 120 film

[flavio81]

BTW: I've understood that color negative films have silver halides before developing but when developing, those are washed away, leaving only the dyes? Probably grain leaves pattern to the dyes itself but developed color negatives isn't usually "grainy" at all because .. well, it doesn't actually have grains. This is what I have read some time somewhere. Please correct if I'm wrong.

No, you're correct. I'm calling "grain" here to what is actually dye clouds. But they get a grainy appearance. Ever optically printed some Superia 1600, HG 1600 or Royal Gold 1000? You would definitely call the results "grainy".

 

[warden]

I wanted to share you the finding that I have personally found; grain is actually so small that scanners cannot resolve it like it is. Nothing else. I really don't know what scanner grain is; maybe it is some kind of more clumped grain, please enlighten if you know. I was personally blown away how I've always thought that the scanner grain is the actual representation of film grain and found out with my own hands that it isn't.

As fas as grain in scans goes, I've never seen grain in a scan that looks like the true grain that I see in a grain focuser, for instance. But that's quite a magnification of course, and in my case the 5mm enlarging lens sees even closer than my grain focuser, but of course it can't see the entire negative, only a few millimeters. So that technique is amazing for doing huge enlargements of tiny sections of a negative. A grain lover's dream.

Please do not draw any conclusions longer than that of my postings here. I also have right to tell my experiences about V600 here without anybody needing to get butthurt about it.

Oh, but drawing conclusions is what we do. Also, "butthurt"? My butt feels great, no worries, no hard feelings, nothing.

 

[brbo]

Then it really shouldn't be that blurry.

Maybe you missed that the crop I posted was enlarged to 200%?

The crop shows what you can get with a 1800dpi scanner which is what Epson 4990 or V600 is capable of.

Anyway, you are free to show us how good you are at getting real 6400dpi out of you V600

 

[grat]

Maybe you missed that the crop I posted was enlarged to 200%?

Actually-- I did. Been a long week.

The crop shows what you can get with a 1800dpi scanner which is what Epson 4990 or V600 is capable of.

Neither of which is the V700 that the image I was complaining about came from, but still.

Anyway, you are free to show us how good you are at getting real 6400dpi out of you V600

I have a V800. Would be difficult to demonstrate a V600. The scanner target-- how was it made? It looks like it's either on paper, or in a really dirty scanner.

 

[warden]

Ok, I see why people are saying that Epson isn't the best scanner for 35mm...

All were scanned using Silverfast 8. And while they are relatively comparable in the first one, the second looks like crap on Epson. Yeah, the frame was definitely underexposed, but Plustek was able to extract a lot more details. Generally it looks like Epson struggles with dark areas. Also the colors on Epson look a bit washed out when compared to Plustek. All images got some minor edits and I tried getting them as close as possible. Although I didn't crop them equally.

Welcome to the forum! Your Epson can do better with 35mm scans than we're seeing here so you'll just need to take the time to learn the best techniques to get there. I think these flatbeds start to shine with medium format though, so I bet you'll be pleased with your scans from your new Bronica. Like you, I have two scanners, one for 35mm and a flatbed for medium format. Eventually I'll switch to digital camera "scanning" but for now scanning with scanners works well for me.

 

[roli]

Welcome to the forum! Your Epson can do better with 35mm scans than we're seeing here so you'll just need to take the time to learn the best techniques to get there. I think these flatbeds start to shine with medium format though, so I bet you'll be pleased with your scans from your new Bronica. Like you, I have two scanners, one for 35mm and a flatbed for medium format. Eventually I'll switch to digital camera "scanning" but for now scanning with scanners works well for me.

I agree that it probably can do better. These were some quick tests that I did. It's certain that I will need to do some more scans before I can get used to it. I am sure that the first one can be done better. I still have doubts that I could do much more with the second one. But I think it's gonna be ok for 120 so I am not regretting the decision.

 

[radiant]

Oh, but drawing conclusions is what we do. Also, "butthurt"? My butt feels great, no worries, no hard feelings, nothing.

Sorry, I was not referring to you at all! I think your posts are good and brings positive insights to things.

 

[warden]

Sorry, I was not referring to you at all! I think your posts are good and brings positive insights to things.

Oh ok, just a misunderstanding on my part. We're good.

 

[yeolde]

My opiniion is a camera

 

[yeolde]

scanners are outdated as a technology

 

[jtk]

Google Epson 600 4X5...plenty of instructions