Howtek 6500 VS EverSmart Pro

sanking · Apr 16, 2008

Another comparison, this time of a Konica color negative.

Howtek scan at 5000 spi. No sharpening applied.

EverSmart scan at 6450 spi, down sized to 5000 spi. No sharpening applied.

Auto contrast and auto color applied to both scans in CS3. Levels used to adjust contrast to match the two scans as best I could.

Comments?

Sandy King

Greg_E · Apr 17, 2008

The second seems to have less edge definition, but it could be a difference in contrast too. That said the flesh tones look much nicer on the second image because they are smoother.

sanking · Apr 17, 2008

Greg_E said:
The second seems to have less edge definition, but it could be a difference in contrast too. That said the flesh tones look much nicer on the second image because they are smoother.

I think you are right. Flatbeds, even professional quality ones, need more recovery sharpening than drums scanners, and I made none at all in this case. It is possible to match the edge definition by applying a small amount of unsharp mask to the EverSmart scan (say amount = 50, radiius = .5 and threshold = 0) , and this also increases the grain size a bit. But in the end the two scanners appear to be delivering about the same resolution, which is somewhat surprising to me.

Sandy

pschwart · Apr 18, 2008

sanking said:
I think you are right. Flatbeds, even professional quality ones, need more recovery sharpening than drums scanners, and I made none at all in this case. It is possible to match the edge definition by applying a small amount of unsharp mask to the EverSmart scan (say amount = 50, radiius = .5 and threshold = 0) , and this also increases the grain size a bit. But in the end the two scanners appear to be delivering about the same resolution, which is somewhat surprising to me.

Sandy

Based on your tests, the EverSmart looks like a winner to me. I had been considering a drum scanner, but this has given me something to think about.

sanking · Apr 19, 2008

pschwart said:
Based on your tests, the EverSmart looks like a winner to me. I had been considering a drum scanner, but this has given me something to think about.

Yes, I too was thinking about buying a Howtek 6500. It may be better than the EverSmart Pro, but not by very much.

I am attaching another version of the EverSmart Scan, with Unsharp Mask applied in the amount indicated earlier. If you compare this crop to that of the Howtek 6500, there is not much separating them IMO.

Sandy

jd callow · Apr 19, 2008

These are great comparisons, but I might prefer to see crops that don't include the printed poster as the colour bias, dot pattern and crispyness of the print may be misleading. I'd also rather see scans made from transparencies with the crop to include a wider tonal range especially shadows.

sanking · Apr 19, 2008

jd callow said:
These are great comparisons, but I might prefer to see crops that don't include the printed poster as the colour bias, dot pattern and crispyness of the print may be misleading. I'd also rather see scans made from transparencies with the crop to include a wider tonal range especially shadows.

JD,

The scans are pretty raw as is and the difference in grain pattern would appear to be determined by the aperture used by the operator in the drum scan and to the fact that there is an anti-newton coating on the glass bed of the Eversmar that diffuses the grain pattern.

As for transparencies, I have always felt that a transparency was an end product and that a color negative a better means to a print. For that reason, and becaue of the much greater dynamic range of color negative film, I quit using transparency film years and years ago.

Sandy

jd callow · Apr 20, 2008

My reasons for wanting to see how the scanners perform when using a transparency is that it is a harder test with a bench mark that you can hold in your hand. Transparencies tend to show off the scanners ability to capture information at both ends of the curve as well as offer a guide to colour fidelity. I agree that they are or where an end product. The limited latitude of papers, the tight grain of the film and the ability to have good prints made from a lightjet/lambda etc makes them desirable to some.

sanking · Apr 25, 2008

jd callow said:
My reasons for wanting to see how the scanners perform when using a transparency is that it is a harder test with a bench mark that you can hold in your hand. Transparencies tend to show off the scanners ability to capture information at both ends of the curve as well as offer a guide to colour fidelity. I agree that they are or where an end product. The limited latitude of papers, the tight grain of the film and the ability to have good prints made from a lightjet/lambda etc makes them desirable to some.

JD,

I understand that dynamic range would be of interest to you, and to anyone anticipating scanning color transparencies. The stated dynamic range of the EverSmart Pro is 3.7, and my tests suggests that it comes close to that. I may try to do a comparison with a Howtek 4500 at some point, but it is safe to say that the drum scanner will come out ahead on this one.

But for my work, which does not involve scanning trannies, I am certain that the dynamic range of the EverSmart is more than I will ever need.

Sandy

L Gebhardt · Apr 29, 2008

I am surprised at how close the flatbed got. What settings were used for the Howtek (aperture and software)?

The one thing I see here, which I have noticed before is, the drum scanner is better able to pick out the dye clouds that make up a negative.

As far as shooting negatives or transparencies for scanning, slides are almost always better. Only when the scene contrast range is too large for the slide film will I prefer negatives. However I still shoot a lot of negative film because I like to print it in the darkroom. Sometimes I decide to scan a neg and I usually curse through the entire process.

sanking · May 2, 2008

L Gebhardt said:
I am surprised at how close the flatbed got. What settings were used for the Howtek (aperture and software)?

The one thing I see here, which I have noticed before is, the drum scanner is better able to pick out the dye clouds that make up a negative.

As far as shooting negatives or transparencies for scanning, slides are almost always better. Only when the scene contrast range is too large for the slide film will I prefer negatives. However I still shoot a lot of negative film because I like to print it in the darkroom. Sometimes I decide to scan a neg and I usually curse through the entire process.

I don't know the aperture that was used on the Howtek 6500, but it appears to have been too small. A friend made the same scan with a Howtek 4500 and the grain is much smoother, with very little if any loss of resolution.

Back in the days I used to use a lot of transparency film, but see no point in doing so if the final product is a print on paper. Color negative film is sharper and has a lot more dynamic range. These days I only make color prints from scans. In fact, I never enjoyed printing color in the darkroom, except for tri-color carbon and carbro which has its own challenges.

Sandy

jd callow · May 3, 2008

sanking said:
I don't know the aperture that was used on the Howtek 6500, but it appears to have been too small. A friend made the same scan with a Howtek 4500 and the grain is much smoother, with very little if any loss of resolution.

Back in the days I used to use a lot of transparency film, but see no point in doing so if the final product is a print on paper. Color negative film is sharper and has a lot more dynamic range. These days I only make color prints from scans. In fact, I never enjoyed printing color in the darkroom, except for tri-color carbon and carbro which has its own challenges.

Sandy

Sandy,
I agree about dynamic range, but the last i actually compared the 2 ISO 100 slide film had tighter/finer grain then any neg film

sanking · May 3, 2008

jd callow said:
Sandy,
I agree about dynamic range, but the last i actually compared the 2 ISO 100 slide film had tighter/finer grain then any neg film

I agree that color slide film has finer grain if it is compared to the grain of color negative film at the same ISO. But the latest Portra color negative films from Kodak scan much better in terms of grain than the older films, and I am pretty sure they are sharper.

So with color negative film you get longer dynamic range, greater sharpness, and color negatives are less of a challenge to scan. Color transparencies give finer grain, but have less dynamic range, less sharpness, and can be a bitch to scan unless you have a high end flatbed or drum scanner.

Sandy

sanking · May 12, 2008

Here is another look at this image. The scan was done by Don Hutton on a Howtek 4500.

This one has the least grainy look, due to better selection of aperture. Sharpness appears to be about on par with the Howteek 6500 and EverSmart Pro. Maybe a slight advantage in sharpness to the 6500 overall for optimum grain.

Sandy

Howtek 6500 VS EverSmart Pro

sanking

Greg_E

sanking

pschwart

sanking

jd callow

Moderator

sanking

jd callow

Moderator

sanking

L Gebhardt

sanking

jd callow

Moderator

sanking

sanking

Howtek 6500 VS EverSmart Pro

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency