Epson V700 or DSLR to scan negs?

[Keoghan]

I've been shooting film for over ten years and have always sent my rolls to get developed at a lab and usually got back relatively low res scans (around 900kb).

I'm shooting more 35mm film than ever and recently invested in a medium format camera as well. To save costs, I've begun developing my own film, but now I need to invest in a decent scanner.

Budget is a factor - I'm reluctant to go over £350 ($440). From my research, my best options seem to be Epson V700 or buying a decent macro lens for my digital Nikon 610 DSLR, plus the lightbox and other bits that go with it.

I understand that photographing on my DSLR may give better results, but it also may be more expensive and less easy/convenient to do.

I don't plan on blowing up or printing my images too large at this stage just want more detail to work with digital scans.

I wondered if anyone could provide an opinion or has any experience on what option I should take? Or if there are any other scanners I should look into?

Thanks

 

[Les Sarile]

What kinds of film do you shoot?

With a proper DSLR scanning setup, one can take advantage of the capture speed over any traditional scanner - few seconds per frame instead of many minutes.

DSLR scanning is quickest and easiest for b&w as the inversion process in post is relatively simple. There is no dust and scratch removal for b&w film in any scanner so you'll have to remove those in post in either case.

If you shoot slides the post work is still relatively easy. DSLR capture is still much faster unless you need dust and scratch removal in which case scanners can save time with this.

If you're going to DSLR scan color negatives, the capture part is still quick but the post work to invert the color can easily negate this speed. Again, if you need dust and scratch removal a scanner can save some more time.

Now post work on DSLR scanned color negatives can be very challenging but there are many here who have successfully done this. One even does it commercially in very high volumes so it is definitely doable.

 

[Steven Lee]

@Les Sarile nailed it. Not much to add, except maybe this: if you're scanning a lot of color negative film, your choice of color inverting software and your digital image editing skills matter even more than hardware.

 

[4season]

For 35 mm and most medium format, I've experimented with camera-scanning (up to 80 megapixel), Negative Lab Pro software, etc, and got respectable results.

However, I've opted to do the bulk of my work with my Epson V700 @ 3200 DPI using the stock film carriers, because the combo gives me a good mix of quality and ease. If you're okay with letting the software choose the exact framing, Epson Scan offers some of the best and easiest color negative reversal that I know of. But I dislike even minor cropping of my scans, so I use Silverfast AI Studio which is more complicated, but it allows me manual control over framing, plus the convenience of batch-scanning.

Multi-pass scans (auto dust removal, etc) don't work real well for me, as they seem to wind up slightly off-register. And even if registration were flawless, it really slows things down, so I no longer use it.

If I really, really want to get perfectionist about it, I've also got a glass film carrier which ensures perfect film flatness, but I rarely feel the need.

 

[foveon_m]

DSLR has a Bayer sensor, Scanners scan each RGB color exactly.^^

 

[Keoghan]

What kinds of film do you shoot?

With a proper DSLR scanning setup, one can take advantage of the capture speed over any traditional scanner - few seconds per frame instead of many minutes.

DSLR scanning is quickest and easiest for b&w as the inversion process in post is relatively simple. There is no dust and scratch removal for b&w film in any scanner so you'll have to remove those in post in either case.

If you shoot slides the post work is still relatively easy. DSLR capture is still much faster unless you need dust and scratch removal in which case scanners can save time with this.

If you're going to DSLR scan color negatives, the capture part is still quick but the post work to invert the color can easily negate this speed. Again, if you need dust and scratch removal a scanner can save some more time.

Now post work on DSLR scanned color negatives can be very challenging but there are many here who have successfully done this. One even does it commercially in very high volumes so it is definitely doable.

Mainly rolls of 35mm (not slides), both b&w and colour, but I have recently invested in a Mamiya 645 to start shooting medium format.

Ok, thanks for that. Don't mind removing any dust/scratches in post.

Thanks for the insights. It's given me a few things to think about while I continue to make my decision.

 

[Keoghan]

@Les Sarile nailed it. Not much to add, except maybe this: if you're scanning a lot of color negative film, your choice of color inverting software and your digital image editing skills matter even more than hardware.

Thanks for the response. Any suggestion on software?

 

[Keoghan]

For 35 mm and most medium format, I've experimented with camera-scanning (up to 80 megapixel), Negative Lab Pro software, etc, and got respectable results.

However, I've opted to do the bulk of my work with my Epson V700 @ 3200 DPI using the stock film carriers, because the combo gives me a good mix of quality and ease. If you're okay with letting the software choose the exact framing, Epson Scan offers some of the best and easiest color negative reversal that I know of. But I dislike even minor cropping of my scans, so I use Silverfast AI Studio which is more complicated, but it allows me manual control over framing, plus the convenience of batch-scanning.

Multi-pass scans (auto dust removal, etc) don't work real well for me, as they seem to wind up slightly off-register. And even if registration were flawless, it really slows things down, so I no longer use it.

If I really, really want to get perfectionist about it, I've also got a glass film carrier which ensures perfect film flatness, but I rarely feel the need.

Interesting. Thanks for this reply. I do feel I'm leaning towards a Epsom V700, so hearing your experience is very helpful and thanks for the pointer about Silverfast AI Studio. I've read a few other accounts of people using a film glass carrier as well to ensure that perfect flatness, but I also feel I wouldn't need this in most cases. And if I ever do need to make a perfect scan, I can just get back a redo it with a glass carrier.

Do you have any examples of your scans your could share by any chance?

 

[Alan9940]

In general, a DSLR scan will provide "better" results than any flatbed scanner; except, maybe, the very high-end flatbeds that cost thousands of dollars. That said, IMO the mistake most folks make when first starting out with camera scanning is not realizing what's really involved to get good scans. Yeah, I know people toss a digicam on a tripod or use their iPhone, and then photograph the film sitting on an iPad, but this isn't going to produce good results, if that's what you're looking for. For camera scanning, you need a decent DSLR, a good macro lens, some means of sturdy support, some way to ensure everything is aligned properly, some sort of holder for the film (these vary quite a bit in cost), a decent light source (high CRI is good), a computer, an miscellaneous bits-n-pieces of software.

Bottom line with camera scanning is it ain't cheap and does have a bit of a learning curve.

 

[4season]

Interesting. Thanks for this reply. I do feel I'm leaning towards a Epsom V700, so hearing your experience is very helpful and thanks for the pointer about Silverfast AI Studio. I've read a few other accounts of people using a film glass carrier as well to ensure that perfect flatness, but I also feel I wouldn't need this in most cases. And if I ever do need to make a perfect scan, I can just get back a redo it with a glass carrier.

Do you have any examples of your scans your could share by any chance?

IME, there's more value to the glass carrier with larger film formats, as bigger expanses of unsupported film will sag more under their own weight. But even so, the majority of my medium format scans are also done with the stock carriers.

Here's a recent 35 mm scan. Not the highest-resolving combo of film and camera (Minolta Hi Matic F, Lomo 100 color negative - Kodak Gold 100?). With V700 scanning at 3200 DPI, it yielded me a 4650 x 3134 TIFF file.

And here's a 100% crop with shadows boosted:

No doubt I could have given the scanner more of a challenge had I shot with Fujifilm Velvia slide film + one of my Canon or Nikon macro lenses. But shooting slide film under that contrasty light would have been no joy, as the shadows would have been rendered as featureless patches of pure black, whereas the negative film yields at least a little bit of shadow tonality.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

For 35 mm and most medium format, I've experimented with camera-scanning (up to 80 megapixel), Negative Lab Pro software, etc, and got respectable results.

However, I've opted to do the bulk of my work with my Epson V700 @ 3200 DPI using the stock film carriers, because the combo gives me a good mix of quality and ease. If you're okay with letting the software choose the exact framing, Epson Scan offers some of the best and easiest color negative reversal that I know of. But I dislike even minor cropping of my scans, so I use Silverfast AI Studio which is more complicated, but it allows me manual control over framing, plus the convenience of batch-scanning.

Multi-pass scans (auto dust removal, etc) don't work real well for me, as they seem to wind up slightly off-register. And even if registration were flawless, it really slows things down, so I no longer use it.

If I really, really want to get perfectionist about it, I've also got a glass film carrier which ensures perfect film flatness, but I rarely feel the need.

Epsonscan allows manual framing as well as automatic.

 

[Philippe-Georges]

Speed = DSLR, quality = Scanner (with the wet scan accessory)
Good software is as important as the scan hardware!

The advantage of a DSLR is that when you'r not scanning, you can take photographs with it (which you might not do...).
My setup is Epson 750 + wet scan accessory and SilverFast software (and some LRC at the end)..

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

I use a V850 which has built in glass into the holders to keep the film flat. I'm not sure if the V700 holders do that. But the V850 holders can be bought for pretty cheap and used on the V700, I believe. I only shoot b/w or positive color. I don;t like the inversion process with color negative film. Chromes are just easier to scan and color correct.

Here are examples with my V850
4x5: https://www.flickr.com/search/?sort...ch=1&tags=4x5&user_id=55760757@N05&view_all=1
35mm: https://www.flickr.com/search/?sort...=1&tags=n6006&user_id=55760757@N05&view_all=1

 

[Les Sarile]

Mainly rolls of 35mm (not slides), both b&w and colour, but I have recently invested in a Mamiya 645 to start shooting medium format.

Ok, thanks for that. Don't mind removing any dust/scratches in post.

Thanks for the insights. It's given me a few things to think about while I continue to make my decision.

DSLR scanning of a larger format film means you're going to get less resolution as you are now applying the sensor across a larger surface. You can take multiple images but now there is stitching and alignment to contend with. The V700 will apply the same DPI on larger format - up to 8X10, as it does on 35mm. This will just take longer scan times.

Dust and scratch removal is just tedious work and a scanner's ICE can help except for true b&w film.

OTOH, the color negative inversion process can be very daunting initially. There are many tutorials on this that can provide guidance. As with anything, there are many advocates for one or the other. Depending on your post skills and persistence, you can get to a point of acceptable results.

For the most part a scanner's color negative conversion can deliver reasonable results. However, there are the occasional head scratchers that can be challenging as well. Getting scanning results acceptable to you is a skill of it's own - DSLR or traditional.

 

[Don_ih]

I set up a thing with an opal light shade on a 40 watt (or 60) bulb, behind a groove to hold my Omega 35mm negative carrier. It had a screw to mount a Canon T3i with a macro lens at the correct distance to get just the frame in the negative carrier. It definitely rivalled the Epson scanner I bought some time after - may have been better (I never checked). I just hated spending time adjusting the images. It took less time to use the dslr, but the majority of the time using the Epson is just waiting for it to finish with the two strips it's scanning. You can do other things while that happens.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

DSLR scanning of a larger format film means you're going to get less resolution as you are now applying the sensor across a larger surface. You can take multiple images but now there is stitching and alignment to contend with. The V700 will apply the same DPI on larger format - up to 8X10, as it does on 35mm. This will just take longer scan times.

Dust and scratch removal is just tedious work and a scanner's ICE can help except for true b&w film.

OTOH, the color negative inversion process can be very daunting initially. There are many tutorials on this that can provide guidance. As with anything, there are many advocates for one or the other. Depending on your post skills and persistence, you can get to a point of acceptable results.

For the most part a scanner's color negative conversion can deliver reasonable results. However, there are the occasional head scratchers that can be challenging as well. Getting scanning results acceptable to you is a skill of it's own - DSLR or traditional.

Most of the inversions of negative color film I've seen here are very poor. The colors never seem normal. The blues particularly look weird. Whether that's because of the difficulty of the edit process, or the fact that color negative film requires proper filtering and accurate exposure setting at the time of shooting to prevent color shifts that can't be corrected in the edit process, I don't know. With chromes, colors are easily adjusted to look normal after the scan in a regular scanner.

 

[Sirius Glass]

One can get a reconditioned Epson Prefection V850 Pro reconditioned from Epson for a lot less money than new and the same warranty.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

One can get a reconditioned Epson Prefection V850 Pro reconditioned from Epson for a lot less money than new and the same warranty.

They currently have a V850 refurbished for $1000 about $300 less than new.

Epson Perfection V850 Pro Photo Scanner - Certified ReNew | Products | Epson US

The quality and control you need to preserve priceless originals, right in your studio – it's easy with the Epson Perfection V850 Pro scanner. You get professional-quality scans that make it simple to digitally archive virtually any original. 6400 dpi resolution1, a 4.0 Dmax, advanced optics and...

epson.com

 

[Sirius Glass]

They currently have a V850 refurbished for $1000 about $300 less than new.

Epson Perfection V850 Pro Photo Scanner - Certified ReNew | Products | Epson US

The quality and control you need to preserve priceless originals, right in your studio – it's easy with the Epson Perfection V850 Pro scanner. You get professional-quality scans that make it simple to digitally archive virtually any original. 6400 dpi resolution1, a 4.0 Dmax, advanced optics and...

epson.com

Thank you for providing that reference for the OP.

 

[blee1996]

I use a V850 which has built in glass into the holders to keep the film flat. I'm not sure if the V700 holders do that. But the V850 holders can be bought for pretty cheap and used on the V700, I believe. I only shoot b/w or positive color. I don;t like the inversion process with color negative film. Chromes are just easier to scan and color correct.

Here are examples with my V850
4x5: https://www.flickr.com/search/?sort=date-taken-desc&safe_search=1&tags=4x5&user_id=55760757@N05&view_all=1
35mm: https://www.flickr.com/search/?sort=date-taken-desc&safe_search=1&tags=n6006&user_id=55760757@N05&view_all=1

Hi Alan

Thanks for the pointer for V850 holders with glass. I just ordered one and will use it on V700.

In my experience, the most important thing about high quality scan is to keep the film as flat as possible. So ANR glass and good film holders are essential. Otherwise, I'm plenty happy with stock Epson Scan software in Professional Mode. But nowadays I mainly use it for Medium format and Large format film scanning.

For 35mm, I invested in a Nikon Coolscan V ED to get more true resolution and dynamic range. Again the stock Nikon Scan software works well for my purpose.

 

[Les Sarile]

Most of the inversions of negative color film I've seen here are very poor. The colors never seem normal. The blues particularly look weird. Whether that's because of the difficulty of the edit process, or the fact that color negative film requires proper filtering and accurate exposure setting at the time of shooting to prevent color shifts that can't be corrected in the edit process, I don't know. With chromes, colors are easily adjusted to look normal after the scan in a regular scanner.

Color interpretation is definitely very personal and subject to countless variables. As you pointed out, with slides you have a direct reference. Too bad maskless color negatives never made it big!

 

[blee1996]

I would like to point out that scanner is not necessarily "slower" compared to dSLR scans. I'm talking about the active time you need to be fully engaged to get the scans done. An example of 135 color negative roll of 36 frames.

- Epson V700: If I load up the film holder, 4 strips of 6 frames each. I only need time to load and unload twice for the entire roll, which amounts to about 2-3 minutes. Then I let the scanner do its work, without supervision. I can go about doing my other business. So whether the scan actually takes 30 minutes or 2 hours, does not really matter to me.

- dSLR scans: how much time do you typically need for each frame? And then the reversal in software. I haven't done it myself, so I would like to get your stats. The main difference is that you have to be there the entire time to get all the scans done, whether on dSLR or on the computer.

So in the end, you might not need to spend as much "active time" on scanner.

 

[JerseyDoug]

I would like to point out that scanner is not necessarily "slower" compared to dSLR scans. I'm talking about the active time you need to be fully engaged to get the scans done. An example of 135 color negative roll of 36 frames.

- Epson V700: If I load up the film holder, 4 strips of 6 frames each. I only need time to load and unload twice for the entire roll, which amounts to about 2-3 minutes. Then I let the scanner do its work, without supervision. I can go about doing my other business. So whether the scan actually takes 30 minutes or 2 hours, does not really matter to me.

- dSLR scans: how much time do you typically need for each frame? And then the reversal in software. I haven't done it myself, so I would like to get your stats. The main difference is that you have to be there the entire time to get all the scans done, whether on dSLR or on the computer.

So in the end, you might not need to spend as much "active time" on scanner.

You're right about the actual hands on time involved for the scans themselves, but I am too impatient to get the scans through the first stage of processing and print a contact page, which takes me less than half an hour in total for single roll of 35mm B&W film. I scan with a Fuji mirrorless camera, which takes less than ten minutes. The files then go through an Iridient X-Transformer batch process to convert them from RAW to DNG, change the file names and tweak the EXIF data. This takes less than two minutes. Then they go through an Affinity Photo batch process that inverts the images, does an auto levels adjustment and exports them to another folder as JPG files. This takes less than three or maybe four minutes. Finally, I use a ContactPage Pro preset to insert the shooting notes from my iPhone and generate a contact page (just like the old contact prints from my darkroom days) from the JPG's. This also takes less than two minutes. The most time consuming part of the whole process is to start up the printer, get out a sheet of paper and print the physical contact page. The Epson P700 is slow to get going. This can take as long as 5 minutes. If I was using my old V700 scanner instead I would still be waiting for the first load of negatives to finish scanning

 

[Philippe-Georges]

I use a V850 which has built in glass into the holders to keep the film flat. I'm not sure if the V700 holders do that. But the V850 holders can be bought for pretty cheap and used on the V700, I believe. I only shoot b/w or positive color. I don;t like the inversion process with color negative film. Chromes are just easier to scan and color correct.

Here are examples with my V850
4x5: https://www.flickr.com/search/?sort=date-taken-desc&safe_search=1&tags=4x5&user_id=55760757@N05&view_all=1
35mm: https://www.flickr.com/search/?sort=date-taken-desc&safe_search=1&tags=n6006&user_id=55760757@N05&view_all=1

Scanning colour negatives and 'reversing' them into a positive image is perfectly doable:

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Hi Alan

Thanks for the pointer for V850 holders with glass. I just ordered one and will use it on V700.

In my experience, the most important thing about high quality scan is to keep the film as flat as possible. So ANR glass and good film holders are essential. Otherwise, I'm plenty happy with stock Epson Scan software in Professional Mode. But nowadays I mainly use it for Medium format and Large format film scanning.

For 35mm, I invested in a Nikon Coolscan V ED to get more true resolution and dynamic range. Again the stock Nikon Scan software works well for my purpose.

Follow the instructions for how to mount the film onto the V850 holders. It's a little different than it seems.

Perfection V800 Photo/V850 Pro User's Guide