The great TP film scanner test

Tricky69 said:
I spent ages looking at the bottom crop, trying to see where it is in the full shot. Then I figured out, one is mirrored to the other ! LOL
Click to expand...

I did test the Yashica 135mm against other 135mms in the boat shots on a tripod and judged the Yashica 135mm, Tak 135mm f3.5, fujinon EBC 135mm were just slightly inferior to...... Canon 135mm f3.5 breechlock and CZJ 135mm Sonnar @ about 100 yards. But everything could change for closer shots, bokeh and pop, anyway I settled on the M42 CZJ 135mm Sonnar as the best all rounder from my 135mms.
 
I have a Polaroid Sprintscan 120 that I use with Vuescan. Scans 35mm and medium format. If it would make a useful comparison I'd be very happy to join in the test.
 
s162216 said:
Unless you wanted to scan Kodachrome Slides using Digital ICE4 which was only ever implemented on the 9000 and actually works properly on them.

I could 'borrow' my dads scanner next time I go home from uni but its an ancient Canon Lide 80 (amazing, it does 2400dpi max optical!!) from about 10 years ago and only does 35mm so I wouldn't expect any good results. Probably the most cumbersome procedure ever: put negatives in holder, place film adapter unit over frame 1, scan, move FAU to frame 2 and repeat. Basically it takes forever.
Click to expand...

I don't want to put you to any troble. If you definatley want to join in I can add you to the list. Just confirm in this thread.

timreeves said:
epson 4490 reporting in.
I'm more than happy to join in :)
Click to expand...

Added!

Fishman Fuji said:
I have a Polaroid Sprintscan 120 that I use with Vuescan. Scans 35mm and medium format. If it would make a useful comparison I'd be very happy to join in the test.
Click to expand...

Added!

I have some spare time in the evenings this week so I will send some PMs to get together a list of addressed etc and also dig out my negatives etc. I will stick them into some holders I have and then await Danny's at the beginning of Feb before dispatching.
 
Tricky69 said:
put me down with my epson 4870 photo

flatbed, 35, MF, LF

£35 second hand on ebay :D
Click to expand...


Dont forget me :)

I also have one of those cheap agfa photo 35mm 5Mp scanners if that would be usefull to those considering buying el cheaponess. The ones you get new for about £30
 
Tricky69 said:
Dont forget me :)

I also have one of those cheap agfa photo 35mm 5Mp scanners if that would be usefull to those considering buying el cheaponess. The ones you get new for about £30
Click to expand...

Oops, sorry! I will add both if that is ok!
 
menthel said:
Sounds feasable. Max res would be non-interpolated though, correct?
Click to expand...
Scan at max non-interpolated res, downsized to 2400 dpi (all in the same software) for the comparison purpouses. For lesser scanners like V500 it gives a tiny bit extra resolution over just scanning at 2400 dpi.
 
menthel said:
I think most of us are aware how lacking our scanners are compared to a good drum scanner! All I need is one, small lottery jackpot...
Click to expand...

You would be surprised - they are not that expensive nowadays. A lot less than Nikon Coolscan 9000 used. A very good one was sold on UKLFPG for a 1000 pounds quite recently :)
 
Last edited:
I'd just like to say that this is a great idea, it will be very interesting to see the results. Depending on how much spare time I have I may be able to assist with my Minolta Milti Pro. The issue is that I have profiled my scanner and use the Dimage Scan software.

To be honest, if nothing else it would be good to know how people are scanning, my workflow is a mess. Slides with the profiles are easy enough but negatives are a different story entirely. I'm currently making linear positive scans and then using ColorPerfect to work its magic (a slightly hit and miss affair).
 
Mr_T said:
I'd just like to say that this is a great idea, it will be very interesting to see the results. Depending on how much spare time I have I may be able to assist with my Minolta Milti Pro. The issue is that I have profiled my scanner and use the Dimage Scan software.

To be honest, if nothing else it would be good to know how people are scanning, my workflow is a mess. Slides with the profiles are easy enough but negatives are a different story entirely. I'm currently making linear positive scans and then using ColorPerfect to work its magic (a slightly hit and miss affair).
Click to expand...

No problem with you joining at all. Not everyone has vuescan, so it will probably be a case of having all of the sharpening, toning etc turned off, scanning at your scanners optimal DPI and then converting to 2400. For uploading I think it will be a case of PS/LR jpeg conversion with no sharpening at max quality. If you want to join in PM me your real name, address and mobile number and I will add you to the spreadsheet!
 
Just a quick bump for this. I think I have everyones addressed now but will check the spreadsheet tonight. I have found my strage full of negs and will pull out the appropriate ones tonight.

I will also have a look at my vuescan settings to help suggest a scanning regime.
 
Sorry guys I've been crap...haven't been online for a while. Life stuff (house buying, shoots etc...)

I have b&w 120 ready to send, acros (out of focus) and tri-x (underexposed). Good start....NOT.

My portra 120 in 160 and 400 is being devved this w/e hopefully.

If time is an issue someone else feel free to jump in. I'm a little disappointed with my negs to be fair
 
I'm sure we can let you off Danny :) i should be free to do the wet prints any time over the next month or so :)
 
Right, a slight revivial for this one. I now have Danny's superb looking negatives in hand and will gather mine and scan.

As for the rules, I think the idea will be to show the best of your scanner. If we level the playing field too much then it may well defeat the object in showing what the scanners are actually capable of.

Therefore the things set in stone will be:

  1. Scan in TIFF
  2. Use whatever scanning resolution gives the best results for your scanner
  3. Scan B&W as greyscale and colour as colour
  4. No sharpening/automatic adjustments allowed
  5. No multiple pass etc

If you want to use ICE etc please feel free.

If you can then convert to JPEG for posting on the web and host as you see fit. I will create a thread for everyone to post the results in. If you want you can send all of the scans to me on a DVD and I will upload and collate both TIFF files and JPEG.
 
Hey Jim

It might be an idea to save and resize the files in exactly the same way, and host them on the same site, as different sites use different compression methods. This could completely change the perceived results.

Glad the got the negs safe and sound :)
 
Mahoneyd187 said:
Hey Jim

It might be an idea to save and resize the files in exactly the same way, and host them on the same site, as different sites use different compression methods. This could completely change the perceived results.

Glad the got the negs safe and sound :)
Click to expand...

No problem. I am happy to take in all of the TIFF files as long as people are happy to send them to me. DVD or some other cheap media would be best. Email may well not be able to take it!
 
Hi menthel, when you say no sharpening/automatic adjustments allowed does that include adjusting the exposure or focus? I do both manually on my scanner as they differ frame by frame.

I was also wondering if it would be worthwhile making a scan with all these requirements and then perhaps one with your personal workflow? As an example I scan my negatives as positives and then use ColorPerfect to invert them using the film profiles.
 
Mr_T said:
Hi menthel, when you say no sharpening/automatic adjustments allowed does that include adjusting the exposure or focus? I do both manually on my scanner as they differ frame by frame.

I was also wondering if it would be worthwhile making a scan with all these requirements and then perhaps one with your personal workflow? As an example I scan my negatives as positives and then use ColorPerfect to invert them using the film profiles.
Click to expand...

It does get more complicated that way. Adjusting focus will be allowed- otherwise the results will be no good! I think the same stands for exposure, if you have that option. However, the adding of another step such as colourperfect is probably a step too far.

I think whilst we want to show what they can do at their best some element of uniformity is required and adding more software into the mix probably is taking it too far out.

So scan all negatives as negatives if that is ok.
 
Yeah, that's fine with me. Are we just dealing with negatives or positives too?

*Edit*

It's worth noting that different browsers will show things differently too. I know that Firefox used to support my Huey monitor profiles but then they altered something and that stopped (this used to be the case, I'm not certain if it still is!). I can only ever be sure about colours within PhotoShop at the moment!
 
Last edited:
Mr_T said:
Yeah, that's fine with me. Are we just dealing with negatives or positives too?
Click to expand...

Mostly negatives. I am thinking of chucking 2 slides into the mix 2, I have one that should be fairly easy and then one on velvia 50- a real challenge for home scanning (at least I find it bloody hard to scan!).

In fact plan is:
1x 35mm B&W 100iso negative,
1x 35mm B&W 400iso negative,
1x 35mm colour 100iso negative,
1x 35mm colour 400iso negative,
1x 35mm mounted slide,
1x 35mm unmounted velvia (eek!),
1x 120 colour,
1x 120 B&W.

So 8 pictures in all, shouldn't take too much time.
 
Last edited:
I'd be really interested to see the results of positive scans. I'm recalibrating my scanner at this very moment in readiness!
 
I've a V500 if the one listed drops out/blows up etc.
Be good to see the results from everyone, is it possible for you to set up an e-mail when the results are in so we can get a copy (on CD?) to see how our own scanner compares even if we arent in the test, that way we'd be able to see if we were getting the max out of our own compared to the same one in the test.

Matt
 
MatBin said:
I've a V500 if the one listed drops out/blows up etc.
Be good to see the results from everyone, is it possible for you to set up an e-mail when the results are in so we can get a copy (on CD?) to see how our own scanner compares even if we arent in the test, that way we'd be able to see if we were getting the max out of our own compared to the same one in the test.

Matt
Click to expand...

I will see how big the total number of files are before promising to post! I think that it may well be quite a few DVDs worth of TIFF files. I will happily put all the jpegs, full size on my flickr though. There has to be some reason for me to have this fancy superfast BT broadband thingy! ;)
 
Am I listed as the V500 scanner? (on my phone here)

If so, can a replacement please step in as I'm packing it up tonight to move house next week, fingers crossed!
 
Mahoneyd187 said:
Am I listed as the V500 scanner? (on my phone here)

If so, can a replacement please step in as I'm packing it up tonight to move house next week, fingers crossed!
Click to expand...

No worries Danny. What we can do is if we don't get s replacement we can put you at the end! ;)
 
I can cover the V500, I'll scan them in before i print them so it gives me something to work to :)
 
robhooley167 said:
I can cover the V500, I'll scan them in before i print them so it gives me something to work to :)
Click to expand...

Great. Negs and slides are assembled. I guess I need to start the scanning!
 
Just out of interest, are we scanning at the maximum resolution these scanners offer or the maximum optical resolution. The V700 for example can scan up to 6400 dpi but with an optical resolution of about 2300 dpi, everything else is interpolation. In the same way I can scan medium format negatives at ~4000 dpi making much larger "more detailed" files than the 3200 optical scanning resolution that my scanner is actually capable of.
 
As a matter of interest is 5400dpi the max optical resolution of a scan elite 5400ii?

It seems to be, on further reading. Seemed rather optimistic!
 
Last edited:
It's listed as having 5400 dpi optical resolution so I assume so. Minolta even went so far as to putting a filter similar to a scanhancer to reduce the apparentness of grain on the scans.
 
The quoted figures of 9000 dpi, 6400 dpi etc are actually optical figures but although the CCD can resolve that, other optics (especially the high pass filter) in the pathway limit the effective resolution so your only effectively getting that although most scanners do show more detail when scanned at their max quoted optical resolution rather than scanning at what you get in the end (i.e 2400 dpi or whatever).

Might I suggest that everyone does a scan at the max quoted optical resolution like 9000 dpi and whatever they consider their scanners actual resolution is like 2400 dpi etc; then downsize the larger image to the same size as the smaller one to see if there is any more detail resolved?
 
Right, I have scanned all 8 pictures now and will sort out packaging/posting tonight.

The major problem I have is that I have recently scanned a lot of MF film and it looks so damn good. Even better when it comes from Danny rather than my dodgy Lubitel piccies.
 
menthel said:
Right, I have scanned all 8 pictures now and will sort out packaging/posting tonight.

The major problem I have is that I have recently scanned a lot of MF film and it looks so damn good. Even better when it comes from Danny rather than my dodgy Lubitel piccies.
Click to expand...

Go MF or go home! ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top