Need advise on purchasing a scanner for 4 x 5 library?

[Jeannine]

I have been devoted for 4 x 5 Toyo user for the past 25 years. I shoot landscape golf course photography with my view camera and velvia. I am being forced to jump in the pool of the digital world. I have a library of thousands of 4 x 5 slides and want to scan them for web, print media (double page spreads), and prints up to 20 x 24 or slightly larger. I am considering purchasing the imacon 848 or 949. Do you think this is a adequate scanner? Any advise in this arena, it is all new to me? I appreciate any comments.

Warm Regards,

Jeannine

[Bruce Watson]

It's a tough question. Only you can say what adequate means to you. The thing is, the more you enlarge, the more you'll see differences. This isn't any different than the analog world. At what stage do these differences begin to bug you? Clearly, YMMV.

My rules of thumb are that consumer flat bed scanners are generally good for about 4-5x enlargement. Pro CCD scanners (flat beds and Imacons) are good up to about 6-7x. Drum scanners prevail over about 8x.

Since your largest use would be a 5x enlargement, you sit on the edge between "classes" of scanners. What you could do, depending on your volumes, is buy and use a consumer flat bed like the new Epson scanners (IIRC, v7xx) for your web and print media needs. For your fine art prints, send out for a drum scan. You'll have to do the calculations, but that might be the biggest bang for the buck for what you are doing.

Alternatively, you might want to look at the high end Creo scanners. These professional flat beds let you fluid mount which would be beneficial for your fine art work, and probably for your magazine work also.

Some things to think about maybe.

[Gordon Moat]

If you are considering either Imacon, at near those prices you could get into a Creo iQSmart 1 or 2, or a Screen Cezanne. Those high end flatbed scanners would be much faster for many 4x5 scans than any Imacon. Also, you could consider getting a used high end flatbed, though a new warranty would be nice.

http://genesis-equipment.com/products.cfm?prodTypeID=6

The above is a good vendor of new and refurbished scanners. If buying new, Kodak GCG handles Creo since last year and the Screen Cezanne can be found new at:

http://www.screen.co.jp/ga_dtp/produ...anneelite.html

Both of the Creo packages I mentioned has a few upgrade options, and are light enough to move and set-up somewhere else. One downside of the Screen Cezanne is that it is fairly heavy, and takes up lots of desk room. Any of these would easily equal or better any Imacon under almost any workflow conditions.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat

[robc]

how many thousands of 4x5's?

[Doug Dolde]

These guys do volume scanning on an Imacon 949. They run four of them. You have to call them for a quote (ask for Guatam Pai) but for me they quoted $14 each for 2050 dpi x 16 bit scans of 4x5. They include dust spotting in this price. Add $2.50 per DVD burned. Their quantity price breaks start at 100 pieces. They will also do color correction if you wish but I declined this option.

I just sent them 22 4x5's today so don't have a real opinion yet but they are highly recommended by several pros who say they will never scan again with these prices.

http://www.jaincotech.com

[Jeannine]

Thanks for your comments so far.
They are really helpful.
If you like please check out our work.
Jeannine
www.henebryphotography.com

[Ted Harris]

What Bruce said. I'd add that you should also look t the higher end Creo's if you see one used. Either the Cezanne (which I run) or the Creo's are the way for you to go IMO. I am not a particular of the Imacon scanners as I just don't think you get real value for money when you are talking in the price range of the 848 and 949. The Screen Cezanne and the Creo IQ2, IQ3 and above are likely to give you better results for you top quality larger requirements. I say are likely because, like so much else the quality of the scan depends to a large extent on the skill of the operator. Finally, remember the computing power requirements you will need to run these machines and deal with high resolution scans which means large file sizes.

[jackcarter]

Well after using a 949 and then purchasing an iq smart 3 i would say your best bet is the 949. My decision is based on quality especially in pulling detail from shadow areas. The creo seems to clump up in the shadows whereas the 949 gives you much smoother tonality. If you look on this site and compare the samples this will show you. Another downside is fighting the dust with the creo as it's a flatbed. I dry mount on my creo and am always plagued by dust even after buying an array of anti static goods. The creo has 2 glass surfaces which sandwich you original hence 2 surfaces to try and keep clean. Yes there is the option of wet mounting but this will cost you another $2000 US plus the supplies of oil and cleaner and time!!!. The 949 you just place in a carrier - no glass surfaces involved. Just use dust off or a static brush to wipe image. Though you will still get dust it's considerably far less than the creo. they both retail at the same price of around $19,000.
The imacon you scan one at a time but with fast scanning times. the creo you can lay several down and start previewing & scanning but scanning time is much slower plus clean up time after. I was suprised by all the recommendations for creo though. On paper it sounds good but as i found out after purchasing it's a whole different ball game. Anyway that's my 2 cents!!

[Ted Harris]

Hmmmmm ... while I don't have any direct experience with the IQ Smart 3 I do run a Screen Cezanne and I can tell you taht it outperforms a 949 in all ways. I don't have the dust and static problems you mention and I either wet mouont or tape my trannies/negs to the glass. OTOH I almost always scan at full resolution and that makes a big difference since the Imacon,when scanning a 4x5 has a fairly low resolution compared to the IQ Smart3. Are you fully exploiting the capabilities of the Creo or scanning at a lwoer resolution to keep file size managable?

[Doug Dolde]

Ted,

Can the Cezanne run on OS X or is it relegated to older Macs with OS 9?