Scanner recommendations for 4x5

Alan Edward Klein · Jan 8, 2020

I currently have an Epson V600 using it for medium format. However, I'm moving into 4x5 large format. Can anyone give a brief analysis on scanners available. I guess I'm looking at the Epson 850 pro and 850 photo. Others?

Ariston · Jan 8, 2020

Alan, I know it's not what you asked, but if you want to save money for film, I can tell you that Microsoft ICE is free and pretty much automatic. It will stitch together two passes from your v600. I have a v550, and it works great.

Someone here recommended ICE to me, and I am glad. If I shot 4x5 more frequently, I might want to upgrade scanners. But for the amount I shoot, I am happy with this solution.

Alan Edward Klein · Jan 8, 2020

Ariston said:
Alan, I know it's not what you asked, but if you want to save money for film, I can tell you that Microsoft ICE is free and pretty much automatic. It will stitch together two passes from your v600. I have a v550, and it works great.

Someone here recommended ICE to me, and I am glad. If I shot 4x5 more frequently, I might want to upgrade scanners. But for the amount I shoot, I am happy with this solution.

How do you do that?

jeffreyg · Jan 9, 2020

Alan,
I would think the 850 would do just fine. I have been using my "ancient" Epson Perfection 4870 Photo for medium and 4x5 for a number of years and am still getting excellent results. I use SilverFast Studio Ai 8 software with it. I must say that I'm not in the nitty-gritty camp of pixel counting or chemistry in my wet dark room. I guess I am an image maker and if it looks good and seems to be an effective print that's what counts to me. I have had both 2 1./4 and 4x5 negatives commercially enlarged to 40 inches from negative scans and will soon have a scanned print (from a 2 1/4 ) enlarged to 72 inches for an up coming April exhibition. Fortunately the subject is soft so ultrasharp won't be necessary. Hopefully it will work.

http://www.jeffreyglasser.com/

http://www.sculptureandphotography.com/

138S · Jan 9, 2020

Alan Edward Klein said:
I currently have an Epson V600 using it for medium format. However, I'm moving into 4x5 large format. Can anyone give a brief analysis on scanners available. I guess I'm looking at the Epson 850 pro and 850 photo. Others?

You can save money with the V800 that is mostly the same than the V850.

The 850 is better if you have to scan Velvia slides with very deep shadows because Silverfast version has the Multi-Exposure feature, with the V800 you always can purchase a Silverfast upgrade to incorporate that feature.

The V850 includes (IIRC) an extra set of holders, so you may prepare next batch while scanning with the other holder.

You can PM if you have any issue when starting with it, or if you need some advice, if I can help.

You will find a remarkable improvement compared to the V600. The V850 is decent for 35mm, good for MF and excellent for LF, the largest the format the more it shines, for 4x5" you will reach 130MPix "effective", which is an insane amount in effective terms, still a fraction of the 4x5" shots have more than this (400MPix effective), but you have to go to an expensive 8000dpi drumscan to take that, in the case the negative has it.

V850 scans always admit some additional sharpening in Photoshop, while in many Pro scanners image comes digitally optimized, not admiting much additional sharpening, see this:

https://petapixel.com/2017/05/01/16000-photo-scanner-vs-500-scanner/

BAC1967 · Jan 9, 2020

How large do the scans need to be? I use a digital camera, a tripod, white backlight and a glassless 4x5 negative holder. I can get a 50 megapixel scan with one shot, no stitching.

JWMster · Jan 9, 2020

You may also want to look into Negative Supply's gear for DSLR scanning - if you've not abandoned that route entirely. I kicked the DSLR scan process to the curb some years back, but am going to give it a go for 4X5... now that like you, I'm heading into LF. Something to think about. Combined with LR/Photoshop and the plug-in from Negative Lab Pro, I'm very optimistic about the prospects of scanning entire rolls of 35 and 120 in short order. LF.... will be a different story, but my expectations are to do all of these with single shots. If I want to print and bother with a multi-shot + stitching process, that's a possibility, too. Something to think about if you already have a DSLR you use for family snaps, events, etc. and so it's not more out-of-pocket $'s. For me, minimizing scanning and computer time is as important to the long term sustainability of MY shooting film as it could possibly be. I've babysat my Nikon LS8000 through 330 recent shots from a trip to France.... only to conclude that depending on ancient hardware and lengthening the process like this probably makes me certifiable.... as in c-r-a-z-y. Something to think about anyway is that DSLR is improving concurrent with the age-ing out of our existing, ancient hardware. Thus, I for one....drooled over a used / refurbished Howtek and pulled a different trigger.

JWMster · Jan 9, 2020

BAC1967: + 20 to your comment!!!!

OP: By the way, there's a "talk" by Peter Krogh at B&H's site on how he set up to scan for the National Archives and a lot of others...especially himself. Yes, he's selling his techniques, books, etc. for a double dip, but you don't have to invent the process on your own to do it at a high level. He's talking about techniques to allow reasonably untrained folks to produce 1,000 scans a day that are usable for just about any purpose.

138S · Jan 9, 2020

BAC1967 said:
How large do the scans need to be? I use a digital camera, a tripod, white backlight and a glassless 4x5 negative holder. I can get a 50 megapixel scan with one shot, no stitching.

but calculate how much of those 50 MPix are effective: http://www.takinami.com/yoshihiko/photo/lens_test/USAF.pdf

and also think that the Epson has ICE, which corrects dust and scharches from an IR image (specially effective for color film), this saves a crazy amount of manpower.

DSLR is today a good choice, and if stitching you may obtain insane performance, (I measured 9000 dpi effective with a reversed enlarger lens) but it also has drawbacks: focus, alignment, color calibration, dust and stitching.

Ariston · Jan 9, 2020

Alan Edward Klein said:
How do you do that?

I put the film flat on the glass and scan one half, then the other half. Then I simply open up ICE and select both of the files I just scanned and click through the steps. It is automatic. It lines them up and stitches them into one file. It works surprisingly well.

I’ll try to send you an example of one I’ve scanned when I get home.

MattKing · Jan 9, 2020

ICE also works really well if you need to scan an 11"x14" print but your flatbed scanner is limited to 8.5" x 11".

Mainecoonmaniac · Jan 9, 2020

Alan Edward Klein said:
I currently have an Epson V600 using it for medium format. However, I'm moving into 4x5 large format. Can anyone give a brief analysis on scanners available. I guess I'm looking at the Epson 850 pro and 850 photo. Others?

I have an old Epson V750. I've scanned 4x5 infrequently. Better Scan carriers make my film scans much sharper. They are harder to use than the Epson film holders, but worth the extra trouble. The Better Scan carriers requires taping and masking.

138S · Jan 9, 2020

The new v

Mainecoonmaniac said:
I have an old Epson V750. I've scanned 4x5 infrequently. Better Scan carriers make my film scans much sharper. They are harder to use than the Epson film holders, but worth the extra trouble. The Better Scan carriers requires taping and masking.

V800/850 new holders have an AN glass, if film curled up then the ANR keeps it quite flat. Also those holders can have height adjusted.

Mainecoonmaniac · Jan 9, 2020

138S said:
The new v

V800/850 new holders have an AN glass, if film curled up then the ANR keeps it quite flat. Also those holders can have height adjusted.

Wow that's great. There are always improvements that give you the upgrade itch.

138S · Jan 9, 2020

Mainecoonmaniac said:
Wow that's great. There are always improvements that give you the upgrade itch.

Epson holders are consumer and not very robust, but the AN is great, still some people prefrer the older ones.

NortheastPhotographic · Jan 9, 2020

138S said:
but calculate how much of those 50 MPix are effective: http://www.takinami.com/yoshihiko/photo/lens_test/USAF.pdf

and also think that the Epson has ICE, which corrects dust and scharches from an IR image (specially effective for color film), this saves a crazy amount of manpower.

DSLR is today a good choice, and if stitching you may obtain insane performance, (I measured 9000 dpi effective with a reversed enlarger lens) but it also has drawbacks: focus, alignment, color calibration, dust and stitching.

Very few high end scanners have ICE. Imacon, any drum scanner, the Creos. People got by. I agree ICE is worth it but in my usage ICE on an Epson scanner is poorly done, and results in image degradation. Whereas on a Coolscan or Fuji Frontier, there is none. Then of course you have B&W film, which cannot take advantage of ICE anyway.

New cameras with advanced pixel shift modes will take you about as far as you want to go with scan resolution. You can even wet scan which may help with dust somewhat. The only traditional scanner I would consider these days is a Durst SIgma 45 and/or Fuji Frontier or Noritsu models for production. For high res work, I use my S1R.

NortheastPhotographic · Jan 9, 2020

https://www.northeastphotographic.com/blog/2020/1/6/medium-format-ektachrome-tested

For anyone interested, the scans I did for this video were with an S1R. You can see my samples in the video and also download high res files directly to check them out.

138S · Jan 9, 2020

NortheastPhotographic said:
For high res work, I use my S1R.

Ii would be great if you could print that chart ( http://www.takinami.com/yoshihiko/photo/lens_test/USAF.pdf ) and post crops of center and corner, then we would be able compare.

If making shifts of entire pixels then not much resolving power is added, but shift can be subpixel, and if photosite is smaller than pixel then there is room for super-resolution effect, so best would be you shot that chart, if you post a low res of the entire shot with a 100% crop of the critical elements then effective resolution can be easily calculated.

Probably the SR1 may take a better scan of 35mm film, but I doubt that it can surpase the 240MPix effective the V850 extracts from a 5x7" negative.

NortheastPhotographic said:
I agree ICE is worth it but in my usage ICE on an Epson scanner is poorly done, and results in image degradation.

Not at all !!! the ICE only modifies the places were Infrared channel shows dust or scharches ! the rest of the image is left absolutely intact. Were you were told that ?

See the train image: https://www.silverfast.com/highlights/isrd/en.html only the detected dirt (in red) is modified.

NortheastPhotographic said:
For high res work, I use my S1R.

OK, me I'm very happy with the V850,

if you want to know your effective resolution just post those shots of the chart and I'll tell you. The Epson extracts 135 MPix effective from 4x5" and 240MPix from 5x7". If the SR1 is able to get that effective resolution with a single shot...

Of course with a DSLR you always can stitch crops... in that case you may outresolve the epson for LF, for sure...

NortheastPhotographic · Jan 9, 2020

138S said:
Ii would be great if you could print that chart ( http://www.takinami.com/yoshihiko/photo/lens_test/USAF.pdf ) and post crops of center and corner, then we would be able compare.

If making shifts of entire pixels then not much resolving power is added, but shift can be subpixel, and if photosite is smaller than pixel then there is room for super-resolution effect, so best would be you shot that chart, if you post a low res of the entire shot with a 100% crop of the critical elements then effective resolution can be easily calculated.

Probably the SR1 may take a better scan of 35mm film, but I doubt that it can surpase the 240MPix effective the V850 extracts from a 5x7" negative.

Not at all !!! the ICE only modifies the places were Infrared channel shows dust or scharches ! the rest of the image is left absolutely intact. Were you were told that ?

See the train image: https://www.silverfast.com/highlights/isrd/en.html only the detected dirt (in red) is modified.

OK, me I'm very happy with the V850,

if you want to know your effective resolution just post those shots of the chart and I'll tell you. The Epson extracts 135 MPix effective from 4x5" and 240MPix from 5x7". If the SR1 is able to get that effective resolution with a single shot...

Of course with a DSLR you always can stitch crops... in that case you may outresolve the epson for LF, for sure...

The V series scanners are very good with larger formats, I agree. But my way of working works for me. It's fast, high quality, and versatile. Even Sandy King (the guy who developed Pyrocat HD) is currently scanning a 5x7 portfolio this way: https://www.largeformatphotography....-VS-my-current-DSLR-(5DII)-VS-Lab-Scans/page4

138S · Jan 9, 2020

NortheastPhotographic said:
The V series scanners are very good with larger formats, I agree. But my way of working works for me. It's fast, high quality, and versatile. Even Sandy King (the guy who developed Pyrocat HD) is currently scanning a 5x7 portfolio this way: https://www.largeformatphotography....-VS-my-current-DSLR-(5DII)-VS-Lab-Scans/page4

Yes, I have read it.

He said that he is guessing 2000dpi effective from the new A7 r4 with a single shot, but the V700 is able of 2900 effective in the hor axis at 5,9" scan width, and 2300 in the V axis. Perhaps he is scanning on bed, I don't know. The V700 does not provide 5x7 holders... and he perhaps if he scanned at 2000 on bed... if doing that he would be using the low res lens...

I'm really skeptical about what people say about scanning, what I know is that for LF, and properly used, the V700 is excellent.

Recently Pali K made a side by side to demonstrate the drum superiority, but with Portra in MF the V700 performed equally good than Creos and an Scanmate 11000 drum. LOL.

https://www.largeformatphotography....Epson-Flatbed-Eversmart-Flatbed-Drum-Scanners
https://www.largeformatphotography....rum-Scanners&p=1479178&viewfull=1#post1479178

(The Epson always admits a bit of sharpening in Ps becuase its internal digital image enhancing is not as good than with Pro scanners)

We reach a point where the film has no more... still a drum may depict better grain... True that in 35mm the V700 is a bit short, but MF and up is another war, if one knows how to scan and to process...

Anyway, no doubt that new dslrs are impressive... (http://www.kennethleegallery.com/html/tech/index.php)

JWMster · Jan 9, 2020

Without a doubt, drum scans knock the socks of DSLR's. But maybe that's not the point. I'd rather spend more time out shooting than in the house scanning. Scanning is right up there with bulk loading 35mm film as among the least creative things we do. Yes there are skills, but....l'd gladly let someone else do it if I could. My problem is that other folks seem to never care quite the same as the original photographer...and suit themselves. So I'm stuck.

FWIW, even old DSLR's are impressive. I've printed 16 X 20 off a Fuji APC and you'd never see the difference relative to a Nikon D860 at that size. I think Epson prints do a max of 300 dpi anyway. Absolute resolution for us hybrid folks just isn't the top criteria. When I bagged DSLR scanning years ago, it was for the reason that the scanner set-up infrastructure was better defined and therefore was easy to adopt. DSLR scanning is an open process with lots of alternatives, and frankly this makes it a tad confusing. Scanning stats are pretty irrelevant. Most Epson flatbed scans look great to me. Then folks will tell you the effective resolution is LOT lower than their ads claim. What else is new? Do what works for you and seems to be most consistent. For all the speed I hope to pick up in DSLR scanning, it's fair to say there's a price. And that price can be that I have to redo work. Fine. What I want is quick scans to create a first blush, like a proof sheet. From there, If I want to spend the time to create a high res scan... that works. Call it a DSLR approach to preview scans... and it just might be good enough to NOT require going back to produce a high res stitched scan. I'd be fine with that. If it can get close to my Nikon scanner, that'd be great. I may have to upgrade the camera...that's fine, too. Not now, but eventually. But if you're already at a point where you want 1 LF neg and 1 scan for your day's output, you're way ahead of me as I'm still back the curve doing the 10,000 crummy shots required to get this thing nailed.

Have fun! and tweak your process your way. Don't get hung up in the tech numbers. I do this too, but don't let my hang ups be yours.

138S · Jan 10, 2020

JWMster said:
Without a doubt, drum scans knock the socks of DSLR's.

IMO first, many times it"s more important the.person who scans snd edits than the machine.

Then with a dslr you may bet well any drum, it takes stitching 9 crops from a 35mm frame and being good at extreme macro.

9000 dpi effective are easily reached, I've checked that with a 1951 glass slide and a reversed lens at high magnification.

locutus · Jan 10, 2020

Same experience here, scanning with the s1r and a reversed apo Rodagon 50 gives me visibly more details than my v800

Another and more important detail, the created raw files have way more malleable with shadow detail that remains far cleaner when pushing.

I don't really have a use for my v800 anymore.

Ces1um · Jan 10, 2020

Ariston said:
Alan, I know it's not what you asked, but if you want to save money for film, I can tell you that Microsoft ICE is free and pretty much automatic. It will stitch together two passes from your v600. I have a v550, and it works great.

Someone here recommended ICE to me, and I am glad. If I shot 4x5 more frequently, I might want to upgrade scanners. But for the amount I shoot, I am happy with this solution.

Wish I knew about Microsoft ice back when I had my 4x5 pinhole- I used "hugin" which was an enormous pain to stitch photos. It got there in the end but it wasn't a very straight forward process.

138S · Jan 10, 2020

locutus said:
Another and more important detail, the created raw files have way more malleable with shadow detail that remains far cleaner when pushing.

This is because with the V800 you don't have multi-exposure in the bundled Siverfast "SE" version (if not purchased separatedly), instead the V850 has the "SE Plus" version that has multi-exposure that should deliver a way better result than the SR1 in dense areas. A linear sensor has an advantage vs an area sensor regarding flare, and multi-exposure overcomes DR limitatons in the epson sensor.

locutus said:
I don't really have a use for my v800 anymore.

Here ymmv. The V850 workflow is way faster as it makes a perfect job with the infrared channel by removing dust and scratches in color film, doing that manually in Ps is a nightmare, it takes a lot of time and never it is as good as if done with iSRX.

When a used SR1 class camera costs $500 I may consider to buy one to scan 35mm and MF, but $3700, plus stand, plus illumination plus DIY setup to keep film flat, etc... I've no use for an expensive dslr as I'm not a Pro (but the exactly counter ) and the smarphone covers my little digital needs perfectly.

Scanner recommendations for 4x5

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency