With regard to SCSI drivers, there is a way to use a driver from an older version of Windows. I did it so I could use the SCSI interface on my fs4000us scanner. I found the method on the internet, though I don't remember the details.When it comes to older scanners, watch out for scanners that require an SCSI connection.
I had to go through hoops to acquire a Windows 7 compatible Adaptec SCSI card in order to use a Minolta scanner. Since then, I upgraded the computer to Windows 10, and there are no Adaptec drivers for Windows 10 and that (or any?) SCSI card.
I no longer have the scanner, and I haven't gone down the rabbit hole of looking for methods to use SCSI with Windows 10.
Yes, that is correct.FARE uses both hardware (infrared light) and software. I believe 3rd party software may use both. For instance Coolscans V, 5000 and 9000 uses a trade marked proprietary Digital ICE4 that Vuescan cannot use but have instead implemented their form of ICE. This was according to Ed back when I first tried it and may have since changed.
But can you only scan a single frame with the FH-3? Or will you be able to batch scan 6 frames with the SA-21, and then pick out one of them to scan in hi-res?
Can't say for sure. Two frames I am.Will the SA-21 accept that short of a film strip?
Does anti-Newton Ring glass help to keep nautatives flatter?
Does Nikonscan have better support for the FH-3 than say Vuescan or Silverfast?
And third, I have a small number, probably less than 120 frames, of 127 B&W that I shot when first got a camera at age 10. I'm honestly not sure hoyw many of those negatives are worth scanning. Is there any practical, or even half-pratical way, to scan these negatives using an FH-3? I realize that I can't scan the entire negative in one pass.
It is. I was just wondering about workarounds, if any. Again, I'm not sure how many of those old 127's are worth scanning. Right now I have them stored in 35 mm glassine envelopes with one side slit open. Not ideal of course.Can't say for sure. Two frames I am.
Never tried but I can't imagine antinewton glass will contribute anything unless the film is warped as opposed to just curly.
Never used 127 film but it seems too tall to fit in the FH3.
I don't use Nikon, but when I was looking for one it was suggested in many places that film strip holder FH-2 (older version) is much better built and one to have over FH-3. Again, this is purely from my reading not direct experience.But can you only scan a single frame with the FH-3? Or will you be able to batch scan 6 frames with the SA-21, and then pick out one of them to scan in hi-res?
If I understand it correctly, the first and last frame of a strip of six frames can be 20% out of focus? That doesn't sound good.The worst case scenario applies only to the first and last frame of the strip as all the rest in the middle are held flat. Also, only about 20% of the leading or trailing edge of the strip may be ever so slightly out of focus.
You can reread exactly what I stated by qualifying that this only applies to very curly strip of film and it is only mostly distinguishable if are using really grainy film like Superia 1600 or similar. So if those don't apply to you - and you did say curly film was not an issue, then it would seem you don't have to worry about it.If I understand it correctly, the first and last frame of a strip of six frames can be 20% out of focus? That doesn't sound good.
Oh ok, well in that case I suppose I won't need it. A couple of more questions regarding the Coolscans, how would you compare the ICE in the 5000/V and the 9000?
Any tangible difference for 35mm? And, as I understand it, the only real difference between the 5000 and the V is the scanning speed, right?
Because the difference between 14 and 16 bit doesn't really matter? Also, I want to thank you for all your help so far. The photo album you provided was great.
You may consider a Plustek for 35mm, the 8100 one is under 300€
This little marvel delivers 3800dpi effective , the same than the Coolscans, but it's cheap, it has warranty, no problem with future operative systems. (https://www.filmscanner.info/en/PlustekOpticFilm8100.html)
Also this cheap version has multi-exposure for dense slides and, it has iSRD dust remover (like ICE) and BUY it because it has NEGA-FIX, the best color inversion you can dream with for color negative film.
https://plustek.com/us/products/film-photo-scanners/opticfilm-8100/
SilverFast actually has two different dust and scratch removal modules. iSRD is hardware based using the infrared channel of scanners with an IR source. There is another module SRDx which is solely software based.As I understand it, iSRD is dust snd scratch removal only in post work and therefore software only.
Also, to achieve 3800dpi scans, you have to scan at 7200dpi mode increasing scan times to 8minutes as well as filesize. Then you have to post process for dust and scratches adding another 5 or so minutes?
By contrast, the slower Coolscan V takes 3 minutes with ICE enabled and 1 minute without ICE. The 5000 takes 50 seconds and 30 seconds correspondingly.
Also, you have to use filmholders and manually advance the frames to scan with the Plustek.
No doubt, maybe cheaper then a Coolscan V and with warranty.
BTW, how much have you used your Plustek and have tested the effectivy of iSRD?
As I understand it, iSRD is dust snd scratch removal only in post work and therefore software only.
Also, to achieve 3800dpi scans, you have to scan at 7200dpi mode increasing scan times to 8minutes as well as filesize. Then you have to post process for dust and scratches adding another 5 or so minutes?
No doubt, maybe cheaper then a Coolscan V and with warranty.
BTW, how much have you used your Plustek and have tested the effectivy of iSRD?
Totally, what makes the job is Siverfast software, the scanner only delivers the IR image, it works perfect, exactly the same than with the Epson....
Les, let me rectify the oinformation I posted. The infrared iSRD dust removal is featured in the 8200 model, but not in the 8100, and it works perfectly. I use an V850 and I tested the 8200 of a friend to learn if it would be worth to me for 35mm. It was a 8200 what I tested, not the 8100, I tested, the 8200 is a bit more expensive 280€ plust VAT
View attachment 251447
The 8200 iSRD is stellar for color film which is designed to be transparent in the IR, for BW iSRX is used and this is a sftware tool.
I was considering the 8200 to complement the V850 to make a good team, both scanning at the same time, the 8200 for 35mm and the V850 for the rest.
In my experience with color negative film the V850 is able to take absolutely all image quality the film has, but for BW, if wanting a more defined grain the plustek has some advantage, and I can produce more having two scanners working in parallel, so I'm seriously considering to get a 8200.
I wonder if Silverfast infrared dust removal works better than Vuescan on the Epson V750 (and related) scanners.
Interesting, the 8200i review on the same site states it's resolution is 3250dpi as opposed to 3800dpi on the 8100?
Scan times per frame is 4 minutes without iSRD and almost 10 minutes with iSRD enabled.
That site also reviewed the Epson V800/850 and conclude that you need to scan at 4800dpi in order to achieve 2300dpi and that scanning at 6400dpi doesn't achieve any more detail.
So if as you said that your V850 is able to take absolutely all image quality the film has - except b&w, then why would you get the Plustek that takes considerably longer to make a scan and requires manual intervention to advance the filmholder for each frame? Couldn't you just apply more sharpening as needed?
I have the Plustek. Truly amazing device for 35mm, only slightly bettered by my Minolta Scan Dual IV which produces comparable resolution with much smaller file sizes.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?