IQ Smart 2 - new input?

It's been a year since anyone has posted any information on the IQ smart 2 and 3 scanners. Since Doug mentioned in a previous post of the issues of the IQ 1, not scanning full rez out to the ends, this model is not as desireable for LF film.

The wonderful scanner comparison page Leigh Perry posted on the homepage of this site, shows the ICG drum superior to every scanner, specially the shot of foam insulation on the bottom, albeit at a $55k price tag. The last generation CREO scanners were quite dissapointing in this comparison considering their high price tag. I was hoping to see the IQ2/3 reviewed in this comparison, but it was not. I have seen NO comparative review or scan samples of IQ2/3 vs. drums or other higher end scanners on the web, although Doug has mentioned a sample scan done by Creo vs. a Tango scan which he felt was equal, which would be quite impressive.

I am curious how close these CCD's are getting to PMT technology in drum scannes. Of course, i would assume if they have met the quality, CREO would be marketing the comparable scans, as anyone would prefer the convience of flat beds over drums.

Of course, i would assume if they have met the quality, CREO would be marketing the comparable scans, as anyone would prefer the convience of flat beds over drums.

Um... maybe. There's more to drum scanning than PMTs, awesome as they are. There's also fluid mounting to a drum, which lets you pull the film very tight against the drum. You get the film held ridgidly in the exact plane of focus, with scanner fluid filling all the surface imperfections. Yes, you can use scanner fluid on a flat bed, but the benefit isn't as great IMHO.

There's also the greater sharpness you get due to the lighting technique - lighting just the spot of the sample reduces light scatter. Lack of lighting control is one of the reasons that flat bed scans tend to be soft and flat in comparison to drum scans.

So get Creo to do a test scan for you...see for yourself.

I will send some film off to CREO, as the answer lies in the scan file. But even then, its hard to compare everything....with only one or two scans

The ultimate arrangement for film flatness, (and lighting as you mentiioned) is the ICG drum with internal mount, whereas centrifugal force improves the flatness, vs. external film mount which works against film flatness. Maybe that is why the ICG scanner is on Leigh Perrys scan-off is quite superior. The scans on the scan-off page were made by the CREO Eversmart, which if this is the proper name, was CREO's first attempt at this type of scanner, introduced in 1996. A lot has changed since then, including a few different evolutions of scanners.

CREO did mention that the PC version of the software had some limitations, such as luminosity, saturation, and a few other batch mode type settings.... you must have a Mac for these to work...there is other non photographic software issues also that were Mac only...... they claim 95% of their use base is Mac, so the conversion to PC was done at as an after thought.

CREO dealer suggesting fluid mounting right on the scanner surface....no need to buy accesory fluid mount station, $3,000 usa.

I'm using the IQSmart 2 for my LF scans. Since I haven't had any of my stuff drum scanned, I cannot make a comparison. I will say that the quailty far out-shines consumer flatbeds like the 1800f. I would highly recommend scanning with oil, which would also mean purchasing the oil mounting station. Setup is a hassel compared to my Imacon 343 but well worth it.

If the largest one was going to scan was going to be 4x5, I'd recommend the Hasselblad/Imacon scanner. If going larger than 4x5 (I scan up to 8x10) I'd recommend a highend flatbed or drum scanner.

Hi Bill, it's been a while since we corresponded. Sounds like you've been doing interesting things. Thanks for the comments on the scanner page.

I haven't yet been able to track down an owner of an IQSmart range scanner. I'd love to incorporate them into the test.

George, if you are interested, drop me a line...

Leigh, I tried to email you with a "YES," but it bounced back. Let me know how I can help.

George