What flatbed scanner for 4x5/5x7 negatives?

[Bill_1856]

I no longer have a darkroom, just about out of Polaroid materials, and will soon need to start making digital prints from my LF negatives.
What moderately priced flatbed scanner do you recommend?
Thanks

[vinny]

v700
scanners (https://search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?p=site%3Alargeformatphotography.info+scanner+recommendations&ei=UTF-8&hspart=mozilla&hsimp=yhs-001)

[Ari]

Epson v-750 or v700.
If you can find a good 4990, that will do fine as well.

[Bill_1856]

I forgot to mention that I only need to scan B&W negatives.

[Matsushime]

The 700 or 750 scanners are good. I currently use a 750 with the wet scanning glass for 4x5. Works great when you sandwich the neg between a ANR glass of sorts. If you want you could grab the updated 800/850. I'd rather the 700/750 due to cheaper price though.

[djdister]

You should be seeing a number of used Epson v700/750 being offered for sale, now that the 800/850 is out. They work perfectly well for 4x5 and 5x7 - although since no film holder is provided for 5x7, you can either make one yourself, or use a ANR glass holder.

[bobwysiwyg]

Are either the Epson v700 or v750 supported under Win 8?

[Bill_1856]

What's an ANR glass holder? Does it use water as medium?

[djdister]

Are either the Epson v700 or v750 supported under Win 8?

Yes, both.

[djdister]

What's an ANR glass holder? Does it use water as medium?

Ant Newton Ring glass. See betterscanning.com for their offerings.

[bobwysiwyg]

Yes, both.

Thank you. Couldn't find it in some listings I've checked.

[Tin Can]

V7XX has an OE 2 up 4x5 film carrier. V8XX single 4x5 carrier. V8XX has new LED light vs V700 florescent light source. Cameras are the same.

Both have a center high res area for smaller than 8x10, like 5x7...

Not much different.

But either unit sold has production differences in focus zone, so many try to adjust for that, either DIY or aftermarket. No mask/carrier for 5X7 on either.

Lot's of confusing ideas everywhere.

I like my V700 just fine.

[fishbulb]

A V700 / 750 / 800 / 850 is a good place to start for scanning sheet film, and really the only flatbed in production right now that is designed for it out of the box. You can't really get the advertised resolution or DMAX out of the Epson - it's all marketing exaggeration - but it still does a good job. If you get an adjustable-height wet-mount kit from BetterScanning.com, and spend some time adjusting the height of the film holder to achieve optimum focus for your particular scanner, you can get really good results.

Most of the tests out there on the internet (such as this one (http://www.filmscanner.info/en/EpsonPerfectionV700Photo.html)) have found that the actual upper resolution limit of the Epson is between 2000 to 3000dpi. Probably the lower end of that range with an un-calibrated dry scan, and closer toward the upper end with a wet-mount scan where you've calibrated the height of the film holder for optimal focus of your particular scanner. So, you're not really going to get 6400dpi from the Epson, but still, 2000 DPI on a 4x5 is about a 70-80 megapixel file (depending on how much you crop the borders), which will get you a 24" x 30" print about 300dpi, and a 40" x 50" print at 200dpi. Certainly "good enough" for most purposes.

If you are scanning roll film, 35mm or 120/220, then there are better options than the Epson - i.e. scanners specifically designed for roll film - but that's another thread.

[bobwysiwyg]

OK, one more question. I've been looking for a replacement for my old Epson 2450 which, unfortunately, is not supported under Win 8, or at least I can't locate a suitable driver. :( So I've been looking at the Epson V series and found that the V700, 750 and 800 all seem to be in the same price range, no significant reduction in the 700 series vs the 800's. Why is this, is the 800 series so marginal in terms of improvements it has not impact on the pricing of the former models?

[Tin Can]

OK, one more question. I've been looking for a replacement for my old Epson 2450 which, unfortunately, is not supported under Win 8, or at least I can't locate a suitable driver. :( So I've been looking at the Epson V series and found that the V700, 750 and 800 all seem to be in the same price range, no significant reduction in the 700 series vs the 800's. Why is this, is the 800 series so marginal in terms of improvements it has not impact on the pricing of the former models?

Because it is not a big improvement.

VueScan will make nearly any scanner work.

[bobwysiwyg]

As I suspected, thanks.

[HMG]

......VueScan will make nearly any scanner work.

+1

I don't understand how some many scanners were "obsoleted" post-XP when Hamrick (Vuescan) can handle it.

[Leszek Vogt]

Let me throw a wrench into all this. Just checked B&H the other day and although they still had V700, the V750 is shown as "discontinued".

Les

[Jim Jones]

Bob -- I replaced my 2450 with a 700, and see little difference in prints up to 16x20. Others may be more critical. Perhaps finding a way to use the 2450 with Windows 8 will be more cost effective.

[Heroique]

What's an ANR glass holder?

As others say, anti-newton ring glass.

Neither the glass, nor the holder, has to be exotic, special or expensive: the glass can be from the local store, the holder can be homemade.

For example, I use a piece of anti-glare (not anti-reflection) glass from the hardware store. It's finely etched on one side, which serves my anti-newton needs. I dry mount my film sheets on the etched surface. It eliminates Newton rings. I've never, ever, ever seen one since I started using it.

[Heroique]

Bob -- I replaced my 2450 with a 700, and see little difference in prints up to 16x20. Others may be more critical...

Just to amplify upon Jim's comment, I have a 4990, but I’ve rented a v750 for a side-by-side, non-scientific comparison. [Executive summary: little difference]

I used a sheet of 4x5 Velvia-50 film (nicely exposed w/ minute details in the subject) and snugly dry-mounted w/ a film holder, similar to Doug Fisher's "Betterscanning" design.

I used Epson Scan for the comparison, selecting the "film w/ film holder" option in each case (i.e., not the "film w/ area guide" option). So I was comparing the 4990’s single fixed lens w/ the v750's “SHR” fixed lens.

I found my 4990’s best plane of focus, which is unique from model to model, to be about 2mm above the glass.

At this optimal plane of focus, my 4990's maximum resolution is about 2000 dpi, perhaps a touch less. Most 4990 users report about 1500 or 1600 dpi, so I think I was blessed with a very good machine.

I really have to squint to see improvement above 1500 dpi, but it’s there if I look carefully enough, even if it’s not a practical matter.

When I rented the v750, I likewise determined its best plane of focus; it occurred at a slightly higher elevation than my 4990.

I then compared the two scanners at 2000 dpi.

My personal result: I couldn’t tell the difference between these scans w/ several carefully inspected crops. However, there was a different "look" to the images that would be difficult for me to describe.

When I went to higher dpi, up to 2400, I still couldn’t tell the difference, but I was making comparisons w/ E-6 4x5 film, not a fancy line resolution chart. If I had used a chart, I suspect the v750 may have appeared a tiny bit better; and, it might have appeared better at 1800-2000, too. However, since I rarely print larger than 11x14, the slightly better performance, if I had seen that it existed, would probably be negligible to me.

[Jim Andrada]

I do 5 x 7 on the Epson wet mount carrier. The 5 x 7 neg will fit inside the higher resolution central area of the scanner just fine. Wet mounting with Kami fluid is quick and easy - I figure well under a minute to get a negative mounted.

[djdister]

I do dry scanning of 5x7 negatives on a v750 using a negative holder made out of two mat boards hinged together, and place that inside the "film area guide" doohickey to scan. The scans are sharp and it works for me...

[Matsushime]

As others say, anti-newton ring glass.

Neither the glass, nor the holder, has to be exotic, special or expensive: the glass can be from the local store, the holder can be homemade.

For example, I use a piece of anti-glare (not anti-reflection) glass from the hardware store. It's finely etched on one side, which serves my anti-newton needs. I dry mount my film sheets on the etched surface. It eliminates Newton rings. I've never, ever, ever seen one since I started using it.

This is a key post for anyone who wants to try the ANR glass.

You do not have to buy an expensive piece of glass for this process. I also buy the same glass as described above for scanning on the 750. My expierences also match. I've never scene a newton ring, ever. It's well worth the effort to get this glass and have perfectly flat negatives, espically those 35mm negs with the God awful arch.

[Tin Can]

Which way is up?

Are most people scanning emulsion side down on scanner glass and placing any flattening, AN or AR glass on top? Which side of glass is up? Is emulsion always down?

Ignoring height adjustments for the moment.

I do something different, but I don't want to confuse the waters.

[bobwysiwyg]

+1

I don't understand how some many scanners were "obsoleted" post-XP when Hamrick (Vuescan) can handle it.

I use, or did use Vuescan. It's an application. Without a compatible driver, Vuescan will never see said scanner.

[djdister]

Which way is up?

Are most people scanning emulsion side down on scanner glass and placing any flattening, AN or AR glass on top? Which side of glass is up? Is emulsion always down?

Ignoring height adjustments for the moment.

I do something different, but I don't want to confuse the waters.

I scan dry, so most of the time its emulsion side up.

[Tin Can]

I scan dry, so most of the time its emulsion side up.

All this discussion has omitted details like that.

[koraks]

I notice no difference depending on which side is up with my 4990. I also found very little difference in terms of focus when raising the film holder by 1 or 2mm above the platen, suggesting the depth of field is pretty big. My observations match those of a maximum optical resolution of about 1800dpi, maybe a tad more. Maybe I'm very sloppy or I have a particularly mediocre specimen of this scanner, but I find it's adequate for my needs and any optimization I have tried only cost time in terms of testing and haven't produced much improvement over the factory configuration.

[Moopheus]

You do not have to buy an expensive piece of glass for this process.

You don't, though I've been satisfied with the kit I got from Betterscanning. The adjustable platform makes it fairly easy to get good focus, definitely a much better scan than provided by the stock holders.

[Ken Lee]

My observations match those of a maximum optical resolution of about 1800dpi, maybe a tad more.

Your observations tally with our own Nathan Potter's analysis. See his graph (http://www.kenleegallery.com/images/tech/Epson750MTFNathanPotter.jpg), which shows that usable contrast drops below 50% once we exceed 1500 dpi.

One can make the case that the scanner produces higher resolution data - and indeed the chart shows scanning data at resolution up to 2500 dpi - but contrast diminishes accordingly.

[Jim Noel]

I no longer have a darkroom, just about out of Polaroid materials, and will soon need to start making digital prints from my LF negatives.
What moderately priced flatbed scanner do you recommend?
Thanks

Microtek i900 or its replacement scan the negatives w/o glass between the negative and the scanner light.

[Heroique]

I notice no difference depending on which side is up.

Based on many threads, when dry mounting, it seems the number emulsion side down folks = the number of emulsion side up folks.

Me, I'm a card-carrying member of the emulsion side down party.

Either way, the key point is that you're putting the film (emulsion side up or down) against the etched (AN) surface of the mounting glass.

[towolf]

I use, or did use Vuescan. It's an application. Without a compatible driver, Vuescan will never see said scanner.

You’re mistaken. Vuescan ships with it’s own drivers for a lot of scanners (not all).

This is how they support lots of scanners on Linux (I use my V750 under Linux). And also how they can support the Nikon CoolScans under 64-bit Windows (which is why I purchased VueScan to begin with).


My father taught me emulsion-side-down for contact prints and for enlargers. So I’m in that camp also. But now the Epson V7X0 holders show clearly that the mirror image should face up, i.e., emulsion side up. The native raw data the scanner delivers is also mirrored if emulsion side is down. They even explained this in the manual of the old Expression 1680.

But now for the V8X0, suddenly they have instructions to put the matte side down and the shiny side up.

[bobwysiwyg]

I'll check into it.

[Tin Can]

Vuescan updates almost daily. Every time I open it, it asks do I want load the latest version.

The guy is on top of it.

[jnantz]

you might get lucky with a epson 4870
i have had one for years and it scans 5x7
you will have to make a negative holder for it ..
(or buy one)

[bobwysiwyg]

Vuescan updates almost daily. Every time I open it, it asks do I want load the latest version.

The guy is on top of it.


A duh, moment. I transferred all apps and data to the new system some time ago, including Vuescan, but it never worked, thinking it was a driver issue. The real problem was not having the 64 bit version of Vuescan. Problem solved, thanks.

[koraks]

Either way, the key point is that you're putting the film (emulsion side up or down) against the etched (AN) surface of the mounting glass.
I agree; in case you use glass, of course. I use the Epson 4990 stock holder which is glassless itself and suspends the film above the platen, resulting in the film not touching any glass. I understand wet mounting could show an improvement, but I haven't tried that approach yet.

[Barry Kirsten]

I was given a HP 4890 and it's my only way of scanning 4x5 negs. Unfortunately it doesn't do a very good job, as I've since found confirmed by some reviews. I'm wondering if this is basically a cheap hardware issue, or could good software like Vuescan make a difference. Thanks.