and I think I may be the first person, that doesn't really like the Nikon.
The Scanmate 5000 hast "only" 12-bit color depth per channel. Do you think that this could make a visible difference between maybe a scanner like the Coolscan with its 16 bits?
What you mean by that? I didn't really understand it ...I would also look into camera scanning using shift and stitch, depending on your budget.
Do you know how Color Quartet works?
But I can mount several slides or negatives at once, couldn't I? So I can run the drumscanner whilst doing other things?It's a great technology but man it's a crazy amount of work for a single scan.
Ok gotcha, I know this procedure but up to now I'm not really convinced about it.Camera scanning essentially involves assembling a good backlit repro setup & using the latest generation of CMOS sensors & macro lenses to 'scan' your film instead of 20+ year old scanners - there are pitfalls to overcome, but it can potentially deliver excellent quality - but more importantly, it offers a degree of future-proofing, as opposed to having to fight with SCSI etc.
But I can mount several slides or negatives at once, couldn't I? So I can run the drumscanner whilst doing other things?
Without any experience with a drum scanner, I'd say with my Coolscan it's worse: I can just scan one medium format picture at once and it takes around 10 - 15 minutes. The amount of work and the stuff I have to learn doesn't really scare me. If the quality of the final images is crazy as everybody tells, I'd say it's worthwhile ... Just my thoughts so far.
I don't really need better quality except the points you mentioned. And the fact, that the Coolscan has some ugly errors like a reflective light problem or stripes in dark areas couldn't be accepted anymore. There are some more issues and I want to leave all this behind and start using a scanning machine without these problems.
I think the scanning times like you mentioned of a whole day are concerning bigger drums. The drums of the Scanmate 5000 are not that big. But that's just my guess. So all together, it sounds pretty good to me. The only point: do I really have to cut all my negatives? Isn't it possible to scan stripes of 6 negatives in 35mm? Or 2 - 3 medium format negatives in one stripe?
That sounds really good to me. I'm nor sure if this is realistic but I was roughly calculating the surface of the drum and there would fit arround one whole film of 35mm and even more than one in medium format. So it would be also fine if I just could load two drums a day and get 2 rolls of film scanned. With my Coolscan, I dont't even reach that amount whilst I have to change the filmstripes every 1 - 2 hours on 35mm. A real pain in the ass.The idea with a drum scanner is to load the drum, preview & set up all the scans you want, then set it running & come back to a stack of finished scans a couple of hours later.
That sounds really good to me. I'm nor sure if this is realistic but I was roughly calculating the surface of the drum and there would fit arround one whole film of 35mm and even more than one in medium format. So it would be also fine if I just could load two drums a day and get 2 rolls of film scanned. With my Coolscan, I dont't even reach that amount whilst I have to change the filmstripes every 1 - 2 hours on 35mm. A real pain in the ass.
Well, I guess I want both. A high end scanner for bigger formats. Until now I just shoot 6 x 7 but I'm planing to go for 4 x 5. Additionally I need to digitalize my 35mm stripes. So, if it's a little work to mount them, I'll go for it. How I said, on the Coolscan it was a real pain in the ass.Drum scanners are better for high res scans of a handful of specific frames - if full film batches are more your need, you might want to look into other solutions - the old high end flatbeds (iQSmart, Eversmart etc) or possibly picking up a minilab type of scanner. Alternatively, a digital contact sheet (easy enough to do with a flatbed scanner or a camera & light table) should tell you enough for selecting what frames to expend the effort on fluid mounting & running on the drum scanner.
Kodak Gold 200, ColorPlus 200, Portra 160, Portra 400, Ektar 100What types (color neg, slides, b&w) and brands (Kodak Ektar, Fuji Velvia, Kodak TMAX) of films do you scan on your Coolscan?
What I actually read about the Coolscan 9000 is that this is a common issue. It doesn't occur only on my device. Turning fine mode on prevents this effect whilst trippling the scan times. Like that it is also written in the Nikon Manual.Banding is not normal for any of these Coolscans and turning fine mode to address this issue isn't either. This mode does increase scan times. Clearly a repair is in order.
In fact there is a relatively satisfying option. I was ordering anti-newton-ring glass in the right size and I modified the 35mm film holder in a way that I get pretty flattened films. The glassholder for medium format is not really well designed. The upper glass is anr-glass, fine. But the bottom glass isn't so you have still no flat film as you have to use masks. Well, I can write a whole book about my experiments, but in the end, they were not satisfying.There are no issues achieving perfectly focused scans - corner to corner, with 35mm film
No, I won't. And putting the 35mm stripes in the glassholder for medium format and scanning each picture singly is a big pain in the ass. Sorry.you could use the glass holder to scan all of the 35mm film. You can also use this holder to get perfectly flat scans corner to corner with medium format.
What I actually read about the Coolscan 9000 is that this is a common issue. It doesn't occur only on my device. Turning fine mode on prevents this effect whilst trippling the scan times. Like that it is also written in the Nikon Manual.
I heard about these issues already from some users. Be glad that your devices don't have these problems!It's unfortunate and I believe you saying your 9000 has banding and all these other issues. Sorry but I've never even heard of a reflective light issue so I can't offer any solutions for you. I just acquired the Coolscan V recently and have been using the 5000 and 9000 since early 2000 when they were first available and haven't seen one incident in tens of thousands of frames of various films scanned to date - 110, 35 and medium format.
Thank you! Let's see what it'll be!Good luck in your search for a better replacement!
I "only" had CS 8000 and you pretty much listed all the gripes I had with it. I could live with all the rest, but the flare was ridiculous (yes, I cleaned everything in the light path). Microtek 120tf was much better in that regard, glass holder was, compared to Nikon's, almost free and also easier to use. It didn't have ICE and could have other issues.I think I have to clarify one point: it's not about the image quality itself. It's about the handling and so on. For example, the Coolscan 9000ED has a problem with banding so I have to turn on the fine mode. That triples the scan times. Furthermore it has a problem with reflective light at contrast edges. Than there is the issue you have with every film scanner: you cannot reach perfect planarity with a film scanner so the edges will always loose sharpness whilst focusing the middle.
And just one little but also interesting point: I would really like to see the outer margin of my images or even the perforation. That is not possible with a Coolscan and it's holders. Not really important but I would pretty like it.
Drum scanner solves the flare, flatness and scanning into the rebate of the film. It's much slower though, wet mounting takes time and skill and scanning itself is not fast either. I wouldn't worry about the 12bit limit, though. I have Howtek 4500 that is also a 12bit scanner internally and that isn't an issue. Consumables (mylar, tape, fluids, wipes) also add up...
What I actually read about the Coolscan 9000 is that this is a common issue. It doesn't occur only on my device. Turning fine mode on prevents this effect whilst trippling the scan times. Like that it is also written in the Nikon Manual.
Well, that's the point. For a huge quantity it tooks very much time with 'fine mode' turned on. So, that's one of the issues.I use the 'fine mode' on my Coolscan 9000 to deal with banding.
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?