current state of scanners for 4x5?

[Kirk Gittings]

I think from Ted's point of view (and my own), he is looking at the question from a large format standard of quality and how to maintain that standard of quality in scans through to large prints.

For instance one of the issues with prosumer flatbeds is shadow noise. With the new version of MultiScan in Silverfast it is possible to significantly increase shadow detail, dynamic range and depth and virtually curtail noise. HOWEVER on scanners like the Epson 750, 4990 etc. the tracking mechanisim is so sloppy that multi passes with these scanners create scan layers that are so far out of shape that the alignment program cannot quite bring them back into alignment full alignment. The result is some blurring in the direction of the scan. IE there is a trade off. A good drum scan has it all, great sharpness, dmax and dynamic range without the trade
offs. To maintain the Large Format quality that I have become accustomed to, I don't print above 16x20 with even a wet scan from a prosumer flatbed. Larger requires a drum scan. Others' standards may differ.

[JavaDuke]

I recently bought Polaroid 45 Ultra on ebay and I'm extremely happy with the quality of my 4x5 scans. Well, maybe it's because my other camera is Canon 10D Yes, some post-processing is still nessesary, and photoshop sharpening algorithms are much better that Silverfast ones.
Speaking of drum scan tradeoffs - there's a big one - cost. Not al of us can afford even an entry-level drum scanner, and pro labs are expensive too.

[Padu Merloti]

I really like my V750, it resolves down to the grain and does a pretty good job with dynamic range (dense areas on negative film and overexposures are handled pretty well). By default velvia scans seem to have a slight magenta cast (I'm not sure about other slide films), but this is pretty easy to fix with film profiles and manual tweaking in silverfast.

Good to know, I'm about to buy a V700 (which seems to be very similar to the V750).
BTW, you have some very beautiful photos in your gallery.

In one of your last photos, I saw the picture of a minolta rangefinder. Do you own it? How do you like it? (assuming you still use it)

I have the oportunity to buy one for $40...

[ducque]

I have had an Epson 4990 for about a year.

I generally use it with Vuescan, with usable results. I have found the Epson driver to be inadequate for anything but simple tasks. I find Silverfast to be unusable.

I have been disappointed overall. The focus is not consistent. I don't know what the dynamic range (Dmax) actually is, but it is much less than advertised. I don't know about scanning chromes, but I think it inadequate for negs.

It serves me well for proofing and "web" images. But I have yet to make a print from a scan which I would give or sell to anyone else.

[sparq]

I recently bought Polaroid 45 Ultra on ebay and I'm extremely happy with the quality of my 4x5 scans. Well, maybe it's because my other camera is Canon 10D Yes, some post-processing is still nessesary, and photoshop sharpening algorithms are much better that Silverfast ones.
Speaking of drum scan tradeoffs - there's a big one - cost. Not al of us can afford even an entry-level drum scanner, and pro labs are expensive too.

Hello JavaDuke,

For how much do the Polaroids go on ebay? I saw some scans from those machines and they were in a different league than E. flatbeds.

[JavaDuke]

I got mine for about $400. But they are pretty rare, I check ebay periodically just out of curiosity but since I got mine about a month ago I haven't seen any of those yet.

[Gene McCluney]

The Microtek Artixscan 2500f (a discontinued model) is quite good with 4x5 and larger negatives, having a top optical resolution (up to 4x5) of 2500dpi. A glassless carrier and very good tonal rendition, when using Silverfast. Microtek made all the Polaroid brand scanners, and still offer a couple of them under the Microtek Artixscan brand, but not the 4x5 one.

I have never found Vuescan (which I have) to be a good choice for any scanner over the other available options when looking for maximum quality. Where Vuescan shines is its support for older discontinued scanners that do not have software compatible with current computer Operating Systems.

[Frank Petronio]

I'm surprised the Imacons haven't been broughtup. They certainly are more expensive than a consumer flatbed but they are currently in production and will work with modern computers and OSs. Parts and software are around and will be around for years to come, thanks to a large installed base. It's also easier to mount the film than a drum.

Quality is closer to that of a good drum scan than a flatbed, and for many people an Imacon is "all" they would ever need. To me it may not be the absolute ultimate but it is the most logical, best choice.

[Dan Baumbach]

I'm surprised the Imacons haven't been broughtup. They certainly are more expensive than a consumer flatbed but they are currently in production and will work with modern computers and OSs. Parts and software are around and will be around for years to come, thanks to a large installed base. It's also easier to mount the film than a drum.

Quality is closer to that of a good drum scan than a flatbed, and for many people an Imacon is "all" they would ever need. To me it may not be the absolute ultimate but it is the most logical, best choice.

I periodically rent time on an Imacon at a local lab and I love the results. I've made 32x40 prints from the scans and they are georgeous. I wish I could afford my own.

- Dan

[Kirk Gittings]

Actually, Frank I did mention Imacons,

I like Imacons and use them regularly whe I am in Chicago at the school. BUt........to do a viable comparison you have to remove all of the sharpening from them. Setting sharpening at 0 (at least on the generation two years ago) was still leaving in a fair amount of capture sharpening. You actually had to set the number too -25 or something to get no sharpening. Doing a scan that way will show you how far they are from drum scans. Having said that I love the scans from them as their capture sharpening is very sophisticated and they certainly exceed the prosumer flatbeds.

I believe Ted is preparing to do a test of one this summer or fall.