Scandig also claims that they can only get 2300 DPI out of an Epson V800/850. My personal experience runs counter to that.
The Epsons do suffer from a lack of adjustable focus-- this means the target has to be scanned at the precise focus-height of the scanner, which on the 700/800 series, is either touching the glass of the bed, or approximately 3mm above the bed. As the 600 doesn't have dual-lens (to my knowledge), the focus height should be at the glass bed height.
There are also many options on the scanning software that can affect the resulting image. I turn most of them off when scanning, which leaves a slightly "flat", mildly unsharp image. But the image can easily be resharpened, and contrast is just a slider.
I never found adding a ruler was very useful for analog film equipment, there is no easy way to determine and apply the correction for that measured focus shift.
Exactly, and I have used a ruler (a measuring tape mostly) in the past, but the actual rule was not very useful to detect and correct the issue. I usually place a flat object on a surface with nice texture like the image above - I usually use the concrete patio, which has a checker pattern, but it was covered in snow, so the carpet was used. Interrogating the photo will show you were the line of focus runs in the concrete/carpet, and 1) it should intersect your target (you can determine front or back focus issues) and 2) you can check for field curvature or tilt, which is easier on the concrete with a checker pattern, but can be done on the carpet too. Measurements and rules I leave to the optical bench.The idea is not to correct something at focusing, but just to establish whether there is a deviation between focus aid and the focus position at the film, that you would not tolerate, and then get the camera adjusted again.I never found adding a ruler was very useful for analog film equipment, there is no easy way to determine and apply the correction for that measured focus shift.
Sure. On a low-res image on a forum. Why do I feel like you are close-minded and trying to argue? Anything I show you won't be good enough.
If I haven't spent time with something and learning how to the use the tool myself to the best of the ability, I don't comment on it. Might be worth considering in the future.
Scandig also claims that they can only get 2300 DPI out of an Epson V800/850. My personal experience runs counter to that.
I don't know why you get the feeling I'm being close minded? I've owned (and still do) a lot of scanners (from consumer flatbed to drum scanner and most in between) that I've learned to use and know pretty well what particular type of scanner is capable of. So, of course, I'm interested in anything you have to show (that's the opposite of being close minded). Btw, how could I even say that anything you show us is not enough?! Either your scan displays detail way past 1500dpi (that is a generally accepted to be the ballpark of V600) or it doesn't...
..
They say they see 2600dpi. My point, though, was that there was something wrong with putting a Hasselblad with a good lens on a tripod, using mirror lock and then judging the quality of the resultant image... by scanning it on an Epson V600.
He might keep sending out his kit to be adjusted for the rest of his life as his scans will never be as sharp as his digital pictures...
It makes even less sense since we can’t get an answer to what the negative looks like unscanned.It makes no sense arguing about a scanner's capabilities in this thread, if the scanner is being used by someone who is new to scanning.
This meme of "oh, Epson scanners are horrible!!!", is not only untrue, in this thread, it's a red herring distracting from the actual problem, which does appear to be an issue with the OP's lens/camera.
I’d be happy to re-scan one of your problem images if you want. So we can rule out your scanner as the issue.
The OP replied "Will do" So he has decided on his course of action and thus aren't we trying to solve a problem for which the OP has already chosen a course of actionJust keep us posted when you hear back from Hasselblad.
Perhaps you should close the thread. LOL. It’s still worth trying to get a response… otherwise some of us might get the impression that we’ve been ignored and then dismissed.The OP replied "Will do" So he has decided on his course of action and thus aren't we trying to solve a problem for which the OP has already chosen a course of action
Might it not make sense to await his "Will do" promise to faberryman and thus the rest of us. I say this in the spirit of avoiding everybody wasting more time until we either hear his good news, namely fixed by Hasselblad's CLA or sad news that nothing has changed and the OP and we are all "back to the drawing board"
pentaxuser
Is that not a good analogy with where we are with the OP and his Hasselblad problem?
Is that not a good analogy with where we are with the OP and his Hasselblad problem?
Wow, lawnmowers and a Bewitched reference, all in one thread.
Jeremy
s I recall SilverFast has a scanning target that you can use to determine the performance of your scanner.
Their version of the 1951 USAF test target. Not as pricey as someI haven't looked yet but here is their link
https://www.silverfast.com/show/resolution-target/en.html
What can I say? It seemed reasonable to me. Just repeating that the OP has decided he wasn't looking for any more help but would report back sounded like I was trying to imply that Brian needed simply to re-read the OP's last 2 postsI am not sure why you need to use a lawn mover analogy to convey that the OP has sent his cameras and lenses to Hasselblad for evaluation and repair. It is not really that difficult a concept to grasp.
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?