Drum scanning technology: Why so expensive?

[bdeacon]

Let's not forget that despite their astronomical price tag as new units drum scanners can be purchased on the used market for a few thousand dollars in most cases. I picked up a perfectly functioning Optronics ColorGetter Eagle (with accessories) last year for less than $3K. Buying a used drum scanner can be a crapshoot, and getting them serviced can be difficult. On the other hand, mine paid for itself in a month and for not much more cost than a good prosumer flatbed (and far less than any Imacon) I am getting much better scans. It’s probably true that 90% of what I scan is crap, and that there is no way to rationalize a hard drive full of 600MB scans of worthless images. But they are my crappy images, and I have the scanner and hard drive space, so I am happy to indulge. And I’m glad to have done so when it comes time to make the occasional 40x50 print.

[robc]

They might be cheap on the second market but wait till the rotation has gone off center and you need a replacement bearing. It won't be cheap then!

[Terence Patrick]

You are confusing consumer or prosumer flatbeds with their professional relatives. Professional flatbed scanners from Screen, Aztek, Kodak/Creo, etc. all start at over 10K and go up to over 40K.

True, I forgot about the Creo used when I was in advertising. I knew a lot of the photographers who shot for us were still using film, I just don't remember taking note of how we got that film digitized for the art directors or production artists.

How much of a difference in performance are we talking in these professional flatbeds when it comes to scanning 4x5 or even 120 film versus a Microtek or Epson? Would the difference be akin to a Phase One back and a Nikon P&S?

Thanks for all the input everyone, I'm still putting a lot of pieces together about scanning film as I've really started exploring the LF world.

[Ed Richards]

> Would the difference be akin to a Phase One back and a Nikon P&S?

More like a 5D and a Phase One, for good negatives. For not so good negatives, things change in a hurry. Of course, this assumes that you are making prints big enough that the difference matters, and that your prints only work because they are sharp.

Having looked at a number of AA prints, few are as sharp as you can get from a good consumer scanner, and, with a proper negative, you can get as good a dmax. But I doubt drum scanning will make my prints better than his.:-)

Do not get me wrong, if money were no object I would get everything drum scanned. I just think there are better places to spend money if it is limited - like shooting a lot more film and taking a lot more trips to increase the chance of getting a negative worth scanning.

[Ted Harris]

Ed, I am not sure sharpness is the point. Nor am I sure that the digicam comparisons work here. The difference is sharpness as one point but it is also, and more importantly, the amount of shadow detail that can be captured. ..... Shadow detail, tonal range, Dmax/Dmin, density range, whatever you want to call it, this is where you shee the hugest differences between the prosumer scanners and the high priced spread. The absolute best Dmax Michael and I have gotten out of any of the Prosumers is a bit under 2.5 for the Microtek 1800f and that is only (excuse the pun) a shadow of the ~ 4 that one expects from any of the high end scanners ... remember this is a log scale so that is a big jump.

[Terence Patrick]

Ted, do you notice a difference in color between the scanners you mentioned? Or is that more a function of the software (assuming the same negative is used)?

[Bruce Watson]

Ed, I am not sure sharpness is the point. Nor am I sure that the digicam comparisons work here. The difference is sharpness as one point but it is also, and more importantly, the amount of shadow detail that can be captured. ..... Shadow detail, tonal range, Dmax/Dmin, density range, whatever you want to call it, this is where you shee the hugest differences between the prosumer scanners and the high priced spread. The absolute best Dmax Michael and I have gotten out of any of the Prosumers is a bit under 2.5 for the Microtek 1800f and that is only (excuse the pun) a shadow of the ~ 4 that one expects from any of the high end scanners ... remember this is a log scale so that is a big jump.

I would also point out that part of what you get in a drum scan is improved tonality - drum scans are really really smooth. This is in part because of fluid mounting around a curved drum. This holds the film in nearly perfect alignment exactly in the plane of focus, while the fluid fills in all the little imperfections of the drum and the film. This tonality improvement can be seen on really rather small enlargements - down to around 2x. It can certainly be seen easily with more enlargement.

The result is sort of like lifting a thin veil from the print. You see more - more shadow detail, more tonal transitions, more subtle highlight transitions. Just more. This is one of the great reasons to use a drum scanner.

And this is in addition to the superior sharpness, huge density range, and huge gamut you get with a drum scanner.

Add to that the fact that most drum scanners have software control of the log amp limits - when you set the black and white points the software sets the sensitivity range of the log amp circuits. This optimizes the drum scanner for each individual film and is one of the reasons a drum scanner can dig so much information out of highlights and shadows both. A drum scanner with a good operator can scan a B&W negative and get more shadow detail (that is, from the least dense part of the film) than a consumer flatbed. And this optimization of the hardware is one of the reasons. The higher sensitivity of PMTs is another. The better optics don't hurt either.

I guess all I'm sayin' is that drum scans are often worth the high price. Drum scanners bring a lot to the table.

[David Spivak-Focus Magazine]

> And lastly, all the cheapskate fine art photographers who are not worried about ultimate quality just won't spend the money on one.

I hope this is tongue in cheek - even just scanning 200 sheets of 4x5 a year on a drum scanner, at $100 a sheet, which is low end for good services, is $20,000.

Drum scans only cost me $15 a scan because my printer does them on such vast quantaties per year for hundreds of other magazines. I would be happy to offer any photographer who needs drum scanning done for whatever purposes the same value with a 72 hour turnaround time. I don't know the price for a scan done above 16 x 20, but I am sure I can find out. Anyone who is interested feel free to PM me here or e-mail me offline at david@focusmag.info.

[Karl Hudson]

Drum scanning is easy to do and comparatively inexpensive (roughly 10% to 20% of their cost when new). For instance the Linocolor software running an S3300 or S3400 from Linotype-Hell / Heidelberg is extremely easy to learn. This software was limited to OS9 but now a company out of Kiel, Germany is offering an OS X solution for driving these wonderful old scanners and it is being released as I write this. There is still at least some interest in keeping these machines up to date and usable. The scanners themselves are still available from third party suppliers (like myself) who grew up around them and hold on to personal feelings toward them. The detail they pull out of a nice transparency or negative is just amazing. I am committed to keeping them going for years to come. I stock parts in my U.S. office as well as my office in Germany. I can safely say that as far as the old Linotype-Hell / Heidelberg scanners, there will be a source for service and spare parts for decades to come (if I live that long). I just want you to know that there is an alternative to buying a high end drum scanner on ebay...you are quite probably buying somebody else's boat anchor. I have purchased them on ebay before and yes, they were broken, but I can repair them, refurbish them and then sell them to end users with confidence and a warranty. Everyone is happy in the end. In fact I will install one Monday in NYC. Although I only sell maybe two of these fine machines every year, it certainly makes me happy when I do. Of course I must do other things for income, but my love for these old scanners keeps me available to the people still using them. It makes me feel good to be appreciated by others who also love the old drum scanners and continue to use them. As far as I know the action shots, as in nature and sports photography, are still mostly shot with film or have the digital cameras gotten fast enough now to clearly capture the fast moving action too???

[Ted Harris]

Terrance, yes there are color differences. There are also dramatic differences in color fringing. Fringing issues are hardware. Color differences are often software related. Therereally is now ay to compare the software used on prosumer scanners .... even Silverfast Ai with that available for the high end scanners ... they are totally different easts.