Epson V700 16 bit b&W?

[jlpape]

Hi All,
I just purchased the Epson V700 and installed the Silverfast SE software. I notice that the SCAN TYPE will not allow me to scan 16 bit grayscale, only 16-->8 bit grayscale. Am I doing something wrong, or is the Epson scanner only 8 bit?
Thanks,
Jim

 

[Jostie]

I think it may be a limitation of the SE version of Silverfast. You will probably have to upgrade to get 16bit output. Check silverfast's website where you will find a comparrison table of features for the various versions.

 

[jlpape]

Hi,
Already looked their web site and do not see 16bit gray scale listed as any kind of an add for higher end versions.
Thanks,
Jim

 

[pellicle]

The scanner is 16 bit able ... use Epson scan? I do

 

[maderik]

You can also scan in 48-bit color and then use only the green channel (or whichever channel looks best to you.)

 

[cupcake_ham]

You can also scan in 48-bit color and then use only the green channel (or whichever channel looks best to you.)

That's the best advice. The green channel on the V700 has the least noise and best sharpness.

 

[pellicle]

That's the best advice. The green channel on the V700 has the least noise and best sharpness.

it is, and it can be good advice if you can't for some reason do 16 bit grey scale

I'm sure you'll find that the greyscale scan is the green channel.

Now if you are scanning a large neg with a high DPI a colour scan then you may take quite a memory hit to do this (say a sheet of 4x5 at 2400dpi), then there will be the time taken to then split channels and drop the red and blue.

but aside from that ...

 

[jlpape]

Thanks for the responses. I have VueScan that I started using to get the 16 bit gray scale, but the suggestion to use only the green channel is a good one that I will try.

Now, which channel does not see the dust?? )
Thanks all.

 

[pellicle]

JimP

if you struggle too much with vuescan, just try good old Epson scan. It works well on black and white negative. Scan Neg as positive and invert.

Try these steps:
http://cjeastwd.blogspot.com/2010/02/black-and-white-neg-scanning.html

 

[cupcake_ham]

it is, and it can be good advice if you can't for some reason do 16 bit grey scale

I'm sure you'll find that the greyscale scan is the green channel.

Now if you are scanning a large neg with a high DPI a colour scan then you may take quite a memory hit to do this (say a sheet of 4x5 at 2400dpi), then there will be the time taken to then split channels and drop the red and blue.

but aside from that ...

Greyscale isn't the green channel....I've compared.

 

[pellicle]

Hi

Greyscale isn't the green channel....I've compared.

interesting ... which model?

I've compared on 3200, 4870 and 4990 and it is as identical as it gets. What did you notice and what machine did you compare on?

You may find this (old) reading interesting too

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/1800F-bw.html

I thought that there was another link I could mention but I can't find it now. I've put some of my early exploration on this topic here:

While that article explores issues of proper registration of the scan of R G and B channels it does show that the R G and B get different focus on the flat bed scanners

Exploring this 6x12 roll film negative

RGB image

Red

Green

Blue

which illustrates the differences in focus obtained by each layer. (as an aside this is something which needs to be taken into account when sorting out focus issues with Epson scanners, as while you may improve one you may detract from another. So the "sweet spot" needs to take into account all three)

The registration of the three is best observed when taking a segment (as in the above) and cycling through R G and B views of the image in the channel splitter of Photoshop. Splitting it into R G and B then making a GIF for demonstration shows it here:

Anyway, I'll be interested to know about your findings if you care to share them

 

[Loris Medici]

First of all, in the context of B&W film, using the green channel (or biasing towards it, when mixing channels from RGB - in order to convert the color image data to grayscale) is pretty much logical, since 50% of pixels in the sensor are green sensitive. You'll need to interpolate from less data when using the other two channels (25% of pixels each...), whereas you have 2x data to interpolate from when using the green channel. BTW, which channel(s) are selected and their mixing ratios (if more than one) will affect the grayscale result very much in case of color film; therefore suggesting to use green channel only may not work each time, depending on image content and intent...

OTOH, I haven't noticed that much sharpness difference / color fringes (if any) with my Epson 2450 - the sample above show serious problems. Maybe it's also (or maybe, "more" - if you like) related to the optics of the camera; I mean the effect may have caused by using a non-achromat or non-apochromat lens??? (Also, was that image scanned single pass or multi-pass? Multi-pass may raise problems if there's play in the positioning belt/system...)

 

[Maretzo]

I guess that the scanner scans, and that the software gives the bits.
I think, as jostie, that it is software limitation. I scan 48 bit color with a Epson V700.

 

[cupcake_ham]

Pellicle, my comparisons are on the V700. Looking at your samples, it appears the green is the best of the lot....which is exactly what I said. Were you disagreeing?

 

[Bob Carnie]

I believe Greyscale would be something like a 50% green/30 %red and 20 % blue. I do not think it is one channel only.

Green is usually the channel I would choose for BW conversion, and blend in a percentage of the red and blue depending on how the channels look when converting to black white from a colour image.

 

[pellicle]

Hi David

Pellicle, my comparisons are on the V700. ...

ok ... interesting.

Were you disagreeing?

nope, I don't have access to a V700, so the last thing I'm about to do is tell someone who has one about it when I don't have one.

I'm sort of interested in upgrading to the V700 but I'm unsure if its a step above the 4990 ... I don't find the 4990 to be any "great shakes" over the 4870 so if the V700 was only going to be that then I probably wouldn't bother.

Sandy has mentioned that one has to scan at the highest res to get the "better optic" to engage, which is annoying for me as I don't want to have to scan 4x5 at 7200dpi (then back sample) just to get at the higher optic and an effective ~3000dpi image anyway ... the memory requirement is horrific.

There have been some other things I've learned about the 700 however which do make it attractive.

May I ask how you checked if was or was not the green channel?

 

[TareqPhoto]

Hi David


ok ... interesting.


nope, I don't have access to a V700, so the last thing I'm about to do is tell someone who has one about it when I don't have one.

I'm sort of interested in upgrading to the V700 but I'm unsure if its a step above the 4990 ... I don't find the 4990 to be any "great shakes" over the 4870 so if the V700 was only going to be that then I probably wouldn't bother.

Sandy has mentioned that one has to scan at the highest res to get the "better optic" to engage, which is annoying for me as I don't want to have to scan 4x5 at 7200dpi (then back sample) just to get at the higher optic and an effective ~3000dpi image anyway ... the memory requirement is horrific.

There have been some other things I've learned about the 700 however which do make it attractive.

May I ask how you checked if was or was not the green channel?

Get V700 or V750, scan at 2400DPI maximum, 6400 will not give you any more gaining details, even 3200 i see too much, i still experimenting with the scanner, but all reviews saying that V700/V750 do better scan somehow than Epson 4000series, also i am very interested in experimenting with fluid/wet scan method with my V750, as i heard it will increase the quality of the scan a bit, so i want to see how, in all cases it seems from your posts that you are so analytic or strict about any technology and you don't go with anything without you are so sure it is worthy, i agree but to limits, to my luck this V750 is my first film flatbed scanner so i don't have issues of the upgrading, if i must upgrade then it should be either the best which is a drum scanner or better film dedicated scanner.

 

[Doug Fisher]

>>one has to scan at the highest res to get the "better optic" to engage, which is annoying for me as I don't want to have to scan 4x5 at 7200dpi<<

You switch between the optics via the software settings. "Film with film holder" enables the "better" lens, "Film with film area guide" uses the lens that focuses at the scanner glass but also has a wider field of view. When the "better" lens is engaged, you do not have to scan at 6400 ppi, you can choose a number of resolutions. How it gets to any final lower resolution has been a topic of debate for a while (i.e. does it always scan at 6400 ppi and then just down sample?).

Doug

 

[pellicle]

>>one has to scan at the highest res to get the "better optic" to engage, which is annoying for me as I don't want to have to scan 4x5 at 7200dpi<<

You switch between the optics via the software settings. "Film with film holder" enables the "better" lens, "Film with film area guide" uses the lens that focuses at the scanner glass but also has a wider field of view.

thanks Doug

 

[pellicle]

Hi

in all cases it seems from your posts that you are so analytic or strict about any technology and you don't go with anything without you are so sure it is worthy, i agree but to limits,

perhaps I too feel the same, but have a higher point of diminishing return on analysis compared to you. I'm an impulse buyer on other things (cheap 35mm lenses for my G1 and power tools for my house renovations being some). I don't think I've invested much time in this process (analysis of the V700, but perhaps spent more in justifying / explaining / demonstrating that I have thought about it (making it seem like I do).

If you have a spare 700 dollars to toss my way I won't hesitate and will just pick up a V700 the day after it arrives.

Mean time (for me) that represents a Nikkor SW 90mm f8 lens which I would like to add to my 4x5 system. If the 700 is "a bees dick" better than my 4990 (already quite good) then its not worth it ...

 

[TareqPhoto]

Hi



perhaps I too feel the same, but have a higher point of diminishing return on analysis compared to you. I'm an impulse buyer on other things (cheap 35mm lenses for my G1 and power tools for my house renovations being some). I don't think I've invested much time in this process (analysis of the V700, but perhaps spent more in justifying / explaining / demonstrating that I have thought about it (making it seem like I do).

If you have a spare 700 dollars to toss my way I won't hesitate and will just pick up a V700 the day after it arrives.

Mean time (for me) that represents a Nikkor SW 90mm f8 lens which I would like to add to my 4x5 system. If the 700 is "a bees dick" better than my 4990 (already quite good) then its not worth it ...

Sorry, but really i didn't understand your points as English is not my first language.
Second, are you going to buy V750? because V700 is cheaper than $700, or you added another expense with its price [Tax, shipping,...etc]? Go with V500 or V600 then, both are cheaper than $300[if excluding tax or VAT and so].
I think you should keep what you have, no need to upgrade, i am not sure if i have same scanner model as you have i may consider to upgrade, but because i am different person than you and i like to upgrade most of the time [not always].

 

[cupcake_ham]

Hi David


ok ... interesting.


nope, I don't have access to a V700, so the last thing I'm about to do is tell someone who has one about it when I don't have one.

I'm sort of interested in upgrading to the V700 but I'm unsure if its a step above the 4990 ... I don't find the 4990 to be any "great shakes" over the 4870 so if the V700 was only going to be that then I probably wouldn't bother.

Sandy has mentioned that one has to scan at the highest res to get the "better optic" to engage, which is annoying for me as I don't want to have to scan 4x5 at 7200dpi (then back sample) just to get at the higher optic and an effective ~3000dpi image anyway ... the memory requirement is horrific.

There have been some other things I've learned about the 700 however which do make it attractive.

May I ask how you checked if was or was not the green channel?

I compared a grey scale scan to an RGB scan looking at the green channel.

 

[pellicle]

I compared a grey scale scan to an RGB scan looking at the green channel.

ok ...