|
I used a V500 to digitize my mom's Kodachromes and got great results. Now I want to use it for my own stuff. Two questions - first, anybody have any betterscanning.com stuff for the V500? More specifically, the 35mm ANR insert. Second - I've tried Silverfast and Vuescan and found Silverfast to be much closer to my needs; if you have Silverfast, which version do you have and why? Are there any features in the more expensive versions you wish you had? I'm currently looking at the SE Plus version for $100.
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2011 06:00
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 10:24 |
|
|
I ended up getting a Betterscanning 35mm anti-Newton-ring insert. I also got a spare holder to go with it. I dremeled off the clips that hold the film down at the top of the holder so the Betterscanning inserts could cover the entire film strip instead of being blocked by the clips. I honestly didn't see any improvement when using the holder, but when I put the film straight on the platen with the ANR glass on top of it, I saw a small but noticeable difference. Both images 100% sections of scans at 2400dpi, the maximum optical resolution of my V500. Left with stock holder. Right with film + ANR glass directly on platen. Would I do it again for $30 per insert? Probably not, but I can see it being incredibly useful if I ever have to deal with severely arched film.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2011 03:28
|
|
|
Moist von Lipwig posted:There's some noticeable shadow detail in the right one that's darker in the left one. What film is this? For some super dense chromes it might be useful to get every extra little bit of dMax. e: oh, another thing I like about being able to put the film straight on the glass: I can scan the whole strip, with frame numbers and everything, if I want. The main challenge now is getting it lined up straight.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2011 17:45
|
|
|
Moist von Lipwig posted:So did you just get the big sheet of ANR glass from betterscanning?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2011 21:28
|
|
|
LuisX posted:Any recommendations for a scanner that scans photos (your typical 35mm processed photos)? Something cheap and something somewhat pricer: one thats around $100 and another at $400 so we have something to compare with. For prints most any flatbed will do. For film I'd say compare the Epson V500 and V700 to your needs.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2011 15:08
|
|
|
Captain Postal posted:I need a 120 scanner, so my options are V500, V600 or 9000F. Everyone here seems to recommend the V series, and for $10 difference I'd get the V600 in case I ever want to go landscape or just bulk scan, but the problem is that we have to pay a get-bent-over-a-chair-tax on photo gear here in Aus, so the pricing works out at roughly:
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2011 13:38
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:Well, the Newton's Rings are horrible. Other than ordering from betterscanning.com, does anyone have any suggestions for where I might find a good piece of glass? I have a feeling that if I walk into a glass-and-windows shop and ask about optical qualities they'll just give me funny looks. Perhaps I'm wrong about that?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2011 04:54
|
|
|
My Filk Mp3s posted:I have tried Epson, Silverfast and VueScan all within the past 24 hours and have been unable to make a 48 bit scan that captures dmax to dmin with no adjustments. All of these programs have a mind of their own. On Silverfast: you're not touching the auto-adjust, are you? I usually get the best results from hitting "reset" on the levels and curves to remove any adjustments Silverfast is doing (aside from the Negafix film profiles - did you check those?), then doing color/curves/etc in Photoshop.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2011 21:00
|
|
|
whereismyshoe posted:i've had such bad luck with v500's. the first one i bought would disconnect the transparency top every time i opened it. called epson, got a replacement. replacement makes a really loud grinding noise every time it scans and the brightness is way, way off all the time and never knows how to crop MF even when I tell it what format it's in. i know it's not my negatives. Try a VueScan or SilverFast trial? I really, really hate Epson Scan, especially scanning MF. The grinding noise probably isn't normal though, so give Epson another call... 
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2012 14:24
|
|
|
Lon Lon Rabbit posted:Reformatted the other night and just reinstalled Vuescan (stupidly didn't check my settings before doing so). Is the negative on the thin side? I get that when I have to boost the shadows a lot to get any detail.
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2012 13:15
|
|
|
Holy poo poo the V700 is so much better than the V500  Same negative, stock V500 holder to stock V700 holder, both 2400dpi, both Silverfast with no extra sharpening.  MrBlandAverage fucked around with this message at 00:25 on May 16, 2012 |
|
#
¿
May 16, 2012 00:06
|
|
|
The XKCD Larper posted:If you value your time in any way you'll just buy a V700 and stop messing around with toy pieces of poo poo. While I agree with the general sentiment, this is putting it really strongly. The value proposition will be different for everybody. For the casual user shooting maybe one or two rolls of 120 a month, that $400 difference is a nice lens and not so much time saved. For those of us shooting a lot of film, though, the ability to scan more than one 6x6/6x7 frame at a time saves so much time that the $400 is justified. That's ignoring 4x5, of course...
|
|
#
¿
May 18, 2012 14:02
|
|
|
The XKCD Larper posted:I think you are trying to describe banding. I have tested for this on my V700 in a handful of ways when I was first playing around with it. Doing it as 16-bit is crucial. If your scanner does not support 16 bit capture then this won't work. Do you mean posterization? Yeah, I get awful results if I forget to change a setting and make my original positive scan as 8-bit.
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2012 21:47
|
|
|
alkanphel posted:Just read through the past 4 pages and didn't see anything about the lock exposure method, so I'm guessing you let the Vuescan software scan on auto and then adjust it in PS later? Raw scan as positive, invert, use curves to remove the base yourself. Set the (inverted) film base as your black point to get you started.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 19, 2012 23:50
|
|
|
The XKCD Larper posted:Good god Just wondering, do you ever post pictures (if so I haven't noticed) or is condescension your sole purpose on these forums?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2012 15:57
|
|
|
The XKCD Larper posted:No, I'm here for the scanner talk. Cool. I too enjoy scanning step wedges, let me tell you about this book I read called Beyond The Zone System... Genderfluid posted:I'm here for the laughs, and, further more, for the epic win, as well How about those Skymall 35mm scanners laffo epic fail~!!!
|
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2012 22:13
|
|
|
Miike posted:I got an issue. I just bought an Epson V500, I'm using a Digitaliza to scan some 35mm with sprocket using the native Epson software. Somehow I keep getting these blue lines in the sprockets themselves. Googling doesn't lead me to any answers. Anybody knows how to solve this? It looks like light leaks around the edge of the holder and/or the edge of the film and/or the edges of the sprocket holes. Can you block off the area around the edge of the Digitaliza somehow?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 25, 2012 18:49
|
|
|
I spent Saturday at a new digital lab up in Chicago learning how to drum scan on a Scanview Scanmate 4000. It's not all that hard - just that mounting the film on the drum takes some practice. I paid $175 for the lesson, which is a great deal since I had two people teaching me alone for 3 hours. Lab membership is going to be $175 monthly, and I'll have to pay an extra $5/scan for materials costs. Pretty amazing deal. 100% crop from a 3200dpi scan on the drum scanner:  100% crop from a 3200dpi scan on my Epson V700, stock film holder:  Noticeable difference, but I probably won't bother except for things I want to print larger than 8x10 and maybe problem negatives with too much/too little density.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2012 03:52
|
|
|
internetdrink posted:I usually scan at my university, where they have a V700. But last time i went there they gave me a third party film holder instead of the epson one. I tried to scan negatives using the Epson software, but all i got was a black picture. Is there something wrong with the scanner or is it the fault of the film holder? I know the original one has a thing for the scanner to detect the film size / holder type. The only thing I can think of, aside from the scanner being broken somehow, is that you put the holder in the scanner in such a way that it was covering the calibration area at the top of the platen. Is that a possibility?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2012 21:32
|
|
|
Schofferhofer posted:My 8800F has started making weird noises and not scanning. Anyone have any ideas as to what avenues I should be pursuing to see whether it's dead or not? Did the transport lock get locked somehow? Check that first.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2012 19:32
|
|
|
big scary monsters posted:Why can scanners like the V500 not do large format? The bed looks big enough to fit 4x5 negs, is it just a lack of compatible holders? The transparency unit isn't big enough. Before I got my v700 I was doing what FasterThanLight suggested for a few weeks, though.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2013 19:49
|
|
|
Saint Fu posted:Are the MF holders from betterscanning.com as awesome as they look? The stock v700 MF holders are hilariously awful. Is the ANR insert really necessary with the betterscanning holder? It looks like the T-bars would be plenty to hold the film flat. I have the ANR plates for the 35mm and they're nice but I kind of doubt they're worth it for the MF holder due to the T-bars. As bad as the V700 MF holders are, my experience with the betterscanning holder was worse. I don't know why they haven't changed the website yet, but they no longer sell the T-locks. Your only choice is the ANR glass. I got really frustrated with using the ANR glass - it's another two surfaces you have to somehow keep absolutely clean even as you're loading the film. I had a lot of problems with dust getting between the ANR glass and the film no matter what I tried, but I have three cats so YMMV. The main benefit of the ANR glass for me was improved film flatness with curly negs, which I haven't had issues with for a long while anyway. I also was hoping I'd be able to scan 3 frames of 6x7 at once with the betterscanning holder... nope. Still just two unless you have some godawfully close frame spacing. Want to buy my betterscaning MF holder? $40 + shipping. I paid something like $130 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2013 06:17
|
|
|
Chill Callahan posted:There's what looks like some CCD noise when I zoom in--does anybody know how to combat this? Can you post an example? The best way to deal with scanner noise, aside from getting a newer/better scanner, is to only shoot negs/slides with perfect density  Not too thin, not too dense. I recommend you take pictures of only 18% grey walls.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2013 19:24
|
|
|
Rev. Bleech_ posted:Thus far I'm quite pleased with this scanner, but Digital ICE-type dust and spot removal does nothing for old B&W Tri X Pan film. Can anyone recommend something that does this by software by batch? With 600 or so scans already in the bag, touching up scratches one by one in photoshop is a non-starter. Digital ICE doesn't work for film with actual silver in it (black & white). Either get your negatives clean before scanning, get fast at dusting, or, preferably, both.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2013 23:49
|
|
|
Rev. Bleech_ posted:Dust isn't really the issue, as they've been kept in nice non-acidic paper sleeves. The issue is scratches and the occasional blemish. In that case, unfortunately, content aware fill and clone/heal is your best bet.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2013 00:31
|
|
|
Bud posted:Scanner thread: there's an Epson 4870 Pro on Craigslist supposedly with all the film holders. If I can get them down to the $200-225 range would it be a better option than the V600? Only if you plan on scanning large format with it.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2013 18:36
|
|
|
XTimmy posted:Thanks again guys, I was more or less doing all that from the get go with no real results. You had it right, with none of the color channels clipping. Then you brought the black points way in. Why? You can remove the cyan cast by placing points in the middle of the curve rather than loving with white/black points more. It does look like you could set the blue white point a little higher, too.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2014 16:44
|
|
|
Baron Dirigible posted:I'm following this advice and processing in PS based on that YouTube video (inverting in PS and adjusting colour levels individually) and it seems as if I should be losing a lot of tonal range -- if the blue channel only takes up a third of the histogram, and I adjust the white/black points to clip each end slightly, doesn't that mean there'll be less distinction between shades of blue? Or is this not how histograms / colours work? Scan as 16 bit positive. Use curves. MrBlandAverage fucked around with this message at 21:59 on Mar 26, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2014 05:45
|
|
|
notlodar posted:HDR = raw = scans as positive no matter what cause it don't give a poo poo This entire post is so confusing and wrong I don't know where to begin. If you're someone trying to figure out scanning, please just completely ignore the quoted post and maybe also everything else by this poster.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2014 16:17
|
|
|
notlodar posted:you can always isolate the best color channel in photoshop but who wants to do that. anybody who wants to exercise enough control over their results to get the best possible output
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2014 17:18
|
|
|
notlodar posted:
I see we've moved on to "rolling with the punches."
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2014 17:57
|
|
Must you guys take everything so seriously?
|
notlodar posted:
You're making everything way more complicated than it needs to be. Please stop posting.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2014 19:00
|
|
|
notlodar posted:Dear Oregoons, This is a bad response to someone who has posted more images in the last month than you have in five years. You should be ashamed.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2014 19:20
|
|
|
notlodar posted:No I actually like your posts here too bad we don't like yours (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2014 19:33
|
|
|
Geektox posted:Yeah, this is my first roll that I shot on my ME Super, so it seems a lot of my shots are out of focus (or I'm not putting the negatives in the correct place on the scanner? The v600 came with holders so I'm fairly sure that's not the case). But here's one: What were your camera settings? It could be that your stock holders aren't at quite the right height, but it looks like it could also be camera shake or your not being used to manual focus. Geektox posted:Sure thing! Here's my more neutral interpretation. The green banding in the middle top is definitely just a JPEG artifact - I couldn't get rid of it without messing up everything else. 
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2014 15:23
|
|
|
BANME.sh posted:If the film is heavily curled (across the width, not length) it can put the center of film outside of the scanners focal plane. That riverbed shot is evenly unsharp, though.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2014 16:10
|
|
|
Baron Dirigible posted:Would someone mind posting a 1:1 detail from a sharp V700 scan? I'm trying to set up my betterscanning holder but I keep getting consistently soft scans no matter how I adjust it. First off, that looks like it could be atmospheric haze or the lens being focused just past infinity. The other thing to consider is that your lab scans probably had some sharpening applied to them. Here's 2400dpi straight out of my v700 with the stock 35mm holders - without sharpening on the top, 150% 1px Unsharp Mask on the bottom. As you can see, scans can handle quite a bit of sharpening. 
|
|
#
¿
May 13, 2014 15:55
|
|
|
LargeHadron posted:I "scanned" some Portra with my dSLR and I'm having a lot of trouble getting the colors to look right. This is the best I could make this photo look: It looks to me like your backlighting has inconsistent color temperature across the frame and might not be full-spectrum. Even aside from that the end result looks a little magenta to me. Mind posting a small version of the original photo straight out of your DSLR?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 3, 2014 16:36
|
|
|
LargeHadron posted:Yeah, no problem. Yeah, you definitely shouldn't use an iPad as a backlight. Also, your red channel is clipped. efb
|
|
#
¿
Jul 3, 2014 17:24
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 10:24 |
|
|
LargeHadron posted:I don't think I want to do that. Is there a way to get around this with what I have? Not really. If you can afford medium format stuff, you can probably afford a $100 Epson V500.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 3, 2014 17:31
|
|