Imacon 343 quality for MF/6x12 negs

[Roger Richards]

Thanks, Howard. There is a difference between the Imacon and Tango scans.

Ted, I found a MT 1800F at Midwest. What has been your experience of the MT scanning 6x12? The scanner comparison here on this site shows the MT not that far different from the 4870. Are the film holders any good? The deal is, if I can do scans that are decent for up to 16x20 prints from 6x8 and 10x20 prints from 6x12, then for very large prints drum scanning is economically viable for me.

I work in multiple formats depending on the project. The MT 1800f's 8x10 negative scanning capability is a plus.

[Ted Harris]

Roger,

IMO you will find the 1800f to perform as well as the 343 in one critical area, DMax. Our tests of the Imacon's indicated that they don't do so well with Dmax and that is important if you are scanning color negatives or transparencies, especially trannies. If you look carefully at the comparisons of the 1800f and the 4870 looking specifically at the red box crop where you see the best examples of shadow detail you will see that the 1800f does a good bit better than the 4870 or 4990 in that area (Dmax).

My experience is that there is no trouble at all getting excellent 16x20 prints from 4x5's if you area thinking about the same size ration from 6x8 and 6x12 then, yes, you can get good 10x20's from 6x12 .... 6x8 to 16x20 is pushing it a bit IMO but I am very very picky anbd it will also depend on yoru subject matter.

Remember that none of the "consumer" level flatbed scanners do any where near as well with MF as they do with LF. I use the 1800f primarily for LF but again, it does ok with 6x9 and 6x12 although I generally don't push the 6x9 beyond 11x14 prints and I almost always scan the 6x12's on the Cezanne because I generally want something larger than 10x20, usually 15x30.

The film holders for the 1800f are quite good but they are frustrating for MF as they come in single frame 6x9 and 6x6. You can get an excellent third party holder for the scanner from Doug Fisher that will hold yoru film in strips. Alternatively, you can tape it down to the glass.

If it were me, I would opt for the 1800f while you can still find one. BTW, Midwest includes free shipping with it .. I got mine from them.

[Roger Richards]

Thanks, Ted. I have Doug Fisher's MF holder for the 4870 so am familiar with it, great product IMHO. I will do some more research to make sure that I am making the right move for my needs. Appreciate your time and trouble.

[JW Dewdney]

The high levels of flare (see the attached pic of the stone bldg above, for example) is the single biggest deal-breaker re: the imacon for me. It seems the imacons are still very in fashion with the amateur crowd (being us) - so that means the crazy part is that superior drum scanners are selling for less than the imacons. So either buy one of them and bite the learning curve bullet - or get them outsourced...

[Roger Richards]

JW, all options are on the table for me at this time. My gut preference is for a solution where I can scan at high res once and then file the neg away. Does anyone know of a source/distributor from where second-hand drum scanners are available, at a reasonable price?

[JW Dewdney]

yes - ebay. They tend to go for precious little there. There's a super compact 3000dpi model (sorry I forgot the name - not such high res- but should be more than enough, and then some, for most of us) that's only $495 on there right now.

If I had the cash-ola I'd buy the chromagraph. Maybe the best drum scanner ever made, IMHO.

[Roger Richards]

I have a question about a manufacturer refurbished drum scanner, the Howtek D4000, which I saw going for $2500. Using a SCSI connection, how would this scanner work with a recent Power Mac runnning Os-X Tiger, and what about software? How good a choice would this be? The comparison on this site shows it to produce decent scans, but I wonder about the technical limitations. Any comments, anyone?

[Gordon Moat]

JW, all options are on the table for me at this time. My gut preference is for a solution where I can scan at high res once and then file the neg away. Does anyone know of a source/distributor from where second-hand drum scanners are available, at a reasonable price?

Hello Roger Richards,

While EBAY is one source, it is more hit and miss on finding a complete and ready to run machine. One well respected vendor in the graphic arts and printing industry is Genesis Equipment:

http://genesis-equipment.com

You can look through their listing of scanners. Some of the drum scanners are okay bargains, though operating costs are something to consider. There are also high end flat beds that are easier to learn to use, and somewhat more cost effective to run; some of these are nearly as capable as older drum scanners.

If you want to search EBAY, then try the Business and Industrial listings. There seem to be more high end scanners going on that than other areas. Delivery and shipping can be other issues, and could be expensive. However, I did see a running and recently serviced Heidelberg Tango go for $6000 (and local pick-up only) a few months ago. You never know what you might find.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat
A G Studio

[Roger Richards]

Thanks, Gordon, that is very good to know about Genesis. The CREO flatbeds are also a possibility, I guess.

[Brian K]

I own an Imacon 646 and have compared it head to head against the Nikon coolscan 9000 and can readily say that the Imacon is clearly superior. Granted the Nikon is great for it's price and ICE is very convenient, but the Nikon just does not have the resolution, sharpness and tonal detail that the Imacon does. The Imacon version of ICE, Flex touch, is not as good.

Regarding Nancy Scans, I would never recommend them. I sent them a chrome to be drum scanned. It was a dark and super saturated image, they scanned it twice and twice it had terrible noise and banding like lines. Totally unuseable, except as an example of bad scanning. I've since scanned the exact same chrome on my imacon and no problem. They also promised me a refund but they never sent me one. All in all a bad experience.