Scanmate 5000 vs Coolscan 9000ED

[Centurio]

Dear community,

I own a Coolscan 9000ED and I think I may be the first person, that doesn't really like the Nikon. There are some points, I can't really deal with - it's not that the scanner doesn't work properly, but I think my expectations are too high in some points. So I'm planing to buy a drum scanner. I have the chance to get a Scanmate 5000. I have absolutely no experience with drum scanning but I heard exclusively good things about the image quality. Some complaints about the workflow, wetmounting, old software ecc., but still the highest image quality. So I wanted to know if there is somebody here, who has some experiences with both scanners, or similar ones. Or just with the Scanmate 5000. Is it worth the change? I'm absolutely willing to learn new processes, but it has to be worth it.
Additional question: 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?

Thank you for your responds.

Best regards

Centurio

 

[Lachlan Young]

and I think I may be the first person, that doesn't really like the Nikon.

You can rest easy, you aren't. The Coolscans are not awful, but they aren't as good as people whose understanding of quality is based on spec sheets rather than visual results would have you believe.

If you can get enough spares with the Scanmate to keep it running, and it isn't hugely expensive to buy, then it's probably worthwhile. I would also look into camera scanning using shift and stitch, depending on your budget.

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?

I don't think the Coolscan necessarily has a higher bit depth at the analogue to digital conversion step - all it's telling you is that is can deliver 16-bit files. And '12-bits' recorded by the sensor/ PMT, does not necessarily equate to '12-bits' output - the 12-bit logarithmic signal recorded in the Heidelberg scanners effectively fills the 16-bits of the container of a more linear .tif output - at least that's essentially what I recollect happens.

 

[Centurio]

Thank you very much for your fast and infomative response.
I'm really relieved to hear, that I am not the only one who isn't glad anymore only about the nice Coolscan specs, but sad with the results. Actually I'm really lucky, because I have the chance to purchase the Scanmate in perfectly working condition for an more or less affordable price (arround 1750€ including the Color Quartet software, the dongle and a functioning computer). Additionally I can sell my Coolscan for much more than I have to spend for the Scanmate. So I could really gain the quality of my scans whilst "earning" money. So that's why I have to know if it's wothwhile. Thank you very much for your opinion so far! As I'm absolutely new, or not even, to drumscanning, I don't know how the software is running for these machines. I'm scanning mostly negatives, so in case the software isn't able to scan them, I could make a linear raw positive scan and convert it afterwards. Nevertheless it would be nice to have a good functioning sofware that could do the job for negatives. Do you know how Color Quartet works?

I would also look into camera scanning using shift and stitch, depending on your budget.

What you mean by that? I didn't really understand it ...

 

[Lachlan Young]

Do you know how Color Quartet works?

Not particularly - you'll be better off with the Scan hi-end group on groups.io - there's a fair number of Scanmate users there. I have looked into buying a Scanmate in the past, but no more than that - above a certain level most high end scanners (CCD or PMT) are more reliant on their operator than the notional spec of the machine - go for what is affordable, reasonably local & has spares! The techniques for getting a good inversion from colour neg are pretty universal & mostly involve getting a good unclipped scan of the neg & doing all the inversion work in Photoshop. I've written up inversion approaches for working with files from Imacon/ Hasselblad scanners, which I need to update to cover other inversion methods apart from the sample & divide approach to correcting out the mask.

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.

 

[NortheastPhotographic]

Have you sent off for drum scans before? I would do that prior to buying one. It's a great technology but man it's a crazy amount of work for a single scan. Personally I would only consider drum scanning if I were making prints in the 60" size range.

 

[Centurio]

It's a great technology but man it's a crazy amount of work for a single scan.

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.

 

[Centurio]

Many thanks Lachlan Young, I agree with you.

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.

Ok gotcha, I know this procedure but up to now I'm not really convinced about it.

 

[NortheastPhotographic]

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.

The quality will be better pretty much only at the margins. Less noise in the shadows, a little bit higher resolution. It makes the biggest difference with slide film. I'm not specifically arguing for a Coolscan, I'm just saying you should at least order a drum scan to see if the quality difference is everything you want it to be. You can mount multiple slides but you're still wet mounting on a drum, which takes time. Frames need to be cut into singles. Then the scan time is measured in hours. A full drum will take an entire day from what I've been told by someone who operates a Tango.

 

[Centurio]

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?

 

[Lachlan Young]

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?

You don't have to cut your negs, you can put strips on a drum just fine. From recollection, 20-40 mins is not necessarily unusual for a full res scan - obviously if you have a dozen+ frames to scan, that time adds up, but you gain that back from lack of retouching time, compared to an Imacon 949/ Hasselblad X5 - which can deliver a 6300ppi scan in under 2 mins off 35mm & if you multiple scan, shift & stitch 120, 6300ppi is attainable in about 10 minutes - and a 2.5gb file. 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.

 

[Centurio]

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.

 

[Lachlan Young]

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.

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.

 

[Centurio]

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.

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.

 

[Les Sarile]

What types (color neg, slides, b&w) and brands (Kodak Ektar, Fuji Velvia, Kodak TMAX) of films do you scan on your Coolscan?
Also, what print sizes are you targeting with each format - 35mm & MF 6X7?

 

[Centurio]

What types (color neg, slides, b&w) and brands (Kodak Ektar, Fuji Velvia, Kodak TMAX) of films do you scan on your Coolscan?

Kodak Gold 200, ColorPlus 200, Portra 160, Portra 400, Ektar 100
Fuji Color 200, Superia 400, Pro 400H
Ilford HP5+, Pan F Plus 50, Delta 3200

Basically these ones. Sometimes also other ones.
All of them on 35mm, some of them also on 120 film.

 

[Les Sarile]

How do you evaluate the results - on screen or print?

Just to be sure, I would like to present some full res examples of unretouched fully automatic scans from my Coolscans (V, 5000 & 9000) to show the qualities I get each and everytime I scan a frame. Also so we have a relatively common reference. If you can provide your own results that would be helpful too.

This is Kodak Ektar 100

Full res version -> http://www.fototime.com/EEA4F124C726025/orig.jpg

This is Kodak TMAX 100

Full rea version -> http://www.fototime.com/C426B6DD4A9A552/orig.jpg

Not asking the quality of the content just the quality of the scan - critical focus, sharpness, color tone/gray scale and detail. Would you say these are the kinds of results you are getting and want to improve on?

 

[Centurio]

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.

The pure quality of the images is really good and superb with the Coolscan, but the points mentioned above are sucking.
(Additionally I am planing to shoot large format. At least at that point I have to use a drum scanner.)

 

[Les Sarile]

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.

There are no issues achieving perfectly focused scans - corner to corner, with 35mm film.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. Of course all these dependent on addressing the banding issue.

 

[Centurio]

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.

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.

There are no issues achieving perfectly focused scans - corner to corner, with 35mm film

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.

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.

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.

And furtheron, what about the reflective light issue?

Sorry, but in my opinion, too many lacks for a Scanner like this. So I have to change. And a drum scanner, like the Scanmate 5000 seems a worthy upgrade.

 

[Les Sarile]

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.

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.
Good luck in your search for a better replacement!

 

[Centurio]

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.

I heard about these issues already from some users. Be glad that your devices don't have these problems!

Good luck in your search for a better replacement!

Thank you! Let's see what it'll be!

 

[brbo]

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.

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.

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...

 

[Centurio]

Hey brbo,

Thank you for your response. Yes, that is really a pain in the ass and I'm not really willing to deal with it anymore though I have no idea how to eliminate that, how you call it correctly, ridiculous flare. Btw, I never tried to clean anything, is there an opportunity to do this without any expert knowledge?

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...

Yeah, I was also pretty sure that a drum scanner could solve all of these problems. Yesterday I had the occasion to purchase a Scanview 5000 but I didn't do it in the end because I had some doubts. As I basically scan negative and the seller, who never scanned negatives before, showed me the workflow I was pretty disappointed how it works. I asked him, whether it is possible to make a linear raw scan with a gamma of 1.0 for later transforming the picture in ColorPerfect into a positive, because the ColorQuartet (the Scanmates software) did a really bad job in negative transforming. But he told me that he doesn't now if this is possible and how. So for the first instant I had to reconsider about the purchase and now I'm trying to find out whether this is possible or not.
Anyone any experience with that? Or generally with negative scanning on a Scanmate and ColorQuartet? I'm pretty sure that it has to work in some way to make a linear tiff with this machine but I have to check this out well before spending almost 2000€ ...

Any experiences about negative scanning and Scanmate 5000?

 

[Tom Kershaw]

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 use the 'fine mode' on my Coolscan 9000 to deal with banding.

 

[Centurio]

I use the 'fine mode' on my Coolscan 9000 to deal with banding.

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.