drum scnning B+W negs ?

[robc]

I spoke to a drum scanner operator yesterday about getting some 4x5 B+W negs scanned. He told me that there were problems with contrast when scanning B+W negs and for that reason they scan all Neg film on a kodak dedicated neg scanner which can only handle roll films. They only use their drum scanner for transparencies.

They use an ICG 370.

My question: Is the problem inherent with drum scanners or is it that the software they use on the drum scanner is tailored towards transparencies. I presume they are using the ICG software. I also presume the kodak machine is tailored to negs which they tell me gives them much better results with negs.

Any thoughts on this? Anyone have experience with ICG and how good its software is for scanning negs?

[Ted Harris]

I'mnot sure if theproblem is inherently inthe ICG or in its software but I can tell you that several different scans done on several different ICG scanners that I have seen all have contrast issues; anexception is the work inthe Scan Around where the ICG scans hold up very well against the competition. This is NOT a problem with all drum scanners, just ICG. I have discussed the issue with ICG's design engineers and they assure me that it is 'operator error' and nothing inherently wrong with the scanner and, that their own internal tests using a Stouffer step tablet show their current scanners easily attain DMax in excess of 3.5. If that is true then there should be no problems with the scanner. As a number of us have frequently said though not all scanner operaters are created equal and some of the softere for the high end scanners is a real bear to learn. I suggest you give ICG a call and ask their advice on tweakign the software for negatives.

[Cesar Barreto]

I've allways had problems when scanning B&W on bureaus wich are used to work for graphic output and I've even heard some saying it's impossible to do so. Color negatives also seem to make this people go nuts and I'm sure it's a software issue, probably related to neg/pos conversion.
Scanning like positives and leaving conversion for PS or similar may turn things a lot more confortable even though it calls for 16bit files to control contrast , now on the way to increase, without worries about banding or alike.
But I'd say the best way to go would be buying yourself a scanner.
What a difference it makes!

[Gordon Moat]

Sounds more like an operator/experience issue. That Kodak is a turd compared to the ICG, unless the operator doesn't understand the software. As Ted mentioned, either contact ICG, or have the place doing the scanning contact ICG; or find another place to get your scans done.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat

[Bruce Watson]

Basically, you need to talk to a drum scanner operator who likes to do negatives. Like me, or Danny Burk, just to name two on this forum (there are too many to name them all ;-).

I own my own drum scanner - an Optronics ColorGetter 3 Pro. I've scanned hundreds of negatives, both B&W and color. What I've found is that scanning negatives is no more difficult than scanning trannies. That said, the ColorRight Pro 2.0 software I'm using is negative friendly and does an excellent job.

Certain scanners / software are heavily optimized toward trannies. Usually these scanners were aimed squarely at the big pre-press houses that worked solely with magazine and advertising and as a result only dealt with trannies. Rumor has it that Heidelberg's scanners and software (think "Tango") have this problem, for example. It wouldn't surprise me if it turns out that ICGs are similarly optimized for trannies. That said, I don't have any first hand experience with any of the Heidelbergs or ICGs. Perhaps someone who has can give more definitive information.

The scanners aimed at smaller pre-press houses had to be more flexible, that is, had to service more customers than just magazines and advertising. They usually came with more flexible software. The so called "table top" scanners come to mind. The ColorGetters, the Howteks/Azteks, ScanMates, and Screens should all be able to handle negatives without too much trouble.

But even if the software is negative friendly, it still takes an operator who wants to make good negative scans. And most of these operators will give you back a file that is on the low contrast side. This is because when you try to capture all the information on the film, you'll be capturing things like specular reflections on water and from flakes of mica in rocks that have pretty impressive density. IMHO, most good scanner operators will scan to capture it all and send it to the artist. They don't want to take creative decisions like what to clip and what contrast to use away from the artists. After all, only the artists knows what the final prints are supposed to look like!

[robc]

I phoned ICG today and they are tracking down an operator who has experience with B+W negatives for me.

Just out of curiosty, does anyone know of other PC software which will work with ICG scanners?

Thanks all.

[Ted Harris]

I phoned ICG today and they are tracking down an operator who has experience with B+W negatives for me.

Just out of curiosty, does anyone know of other PC software which will work with ICG scanners?

Thanks all.

AFAIK there is isn't any, as with most of the current model drum scanners and high end flatbed scanners the software is proprietary to the scanner manufacturer. Silverfast is available for a few high end scanners but a quick scan of their webpage seems to indicate that it is not available for any of thecurrent models. Besides, why would it matter? I assume anyonewho is operating an ICG scanner has the software or they couldn't run the machine.

[Roger Krueger]

No, in fact just the opposite--a drum can see further into dense B&W than a CCD scanner, especially CCD scanners that use a collimated light source, like the LED-based Nikons.