Purchase drum Scanner or pay for scans

[Ted Harris]

The biggest problem with Imacon scanners, IMO, is not their resolution but their DMax. Three years ago we tested a 949 and found its Dmax to be about the same as the 4990.

[snuck]

I've come to a little bit of a compromise. I can buy some time in a local lab on the imacon workstation for 45 bucks an hour. I can get a bunch of scans done, maybe around 7 per hour, during that time which makes it cheaper than getting them scanned in house at something like 120 dollars for a single 300+MB scan.

[Kirk Gittings]

The biggest problem with Imacon scanners, IMO, is not their resolution but their DMax. Three years ago we tested a 949 and found its Dmax to be about the same as the 4990.

Resolution is better on the 949, I was talking about the 800 series Ted, which on the three I used had resolution issues particularly on a cost/quality value comparison. Given their price vs. even a used pro flatbed or drum scanner, IME I would say that they have three drawbacks, resolution, noise levels and dmax (though low d-max can be somewhat adjusted for in b&w by exposure and dev.-targeting your film for the scanner, but resolution and noise is one thing you are stuck with). In the scanner comparison here you can see that there is allot of sharpening in the file, which does not represent its true resolution.

[Kirk Gittings]

I've come to a little bit of a compromise. I can buy some time in a local lab on the imacon workstation for 45 bucks an hour. I can get a bunch of scans done, maybe around 7 per hour, during that time which makes it cheaper than getting them scanned in house at something like 120 dollars for a single 300+MB scan.

To maximize your $ layout do what some people here have suggested, scan in the 3f raw format with no adjustments and download the software on your home computer to do the processing there. I personally haven't done this but it sounds doable. That way you should be able to scan at least 20 an hour or more even.

[snuck]

Well now that I have the workflow down, I could probably hammer out a 300+MB 4x5 scan every 5 minutes.

[Kirk Gittings]

Snuck (?),

See this thread:

http://www.largeformatphotography.in...raw#post296973

[joolsb]

To maximize your $ layout do what some people here have suggested, scan in the 3f raw format with no adjustments and download the software on your home computer to do the processing there.

The only problem with this approach is that the Imacon software refuses to export 16 bit TIFFs so if you want to do further work in PS then you are forced to live with a loss of quality. Quite why they think this is acceptable in a professional product is beyond me.

[pango]

I have no experience with LF, but I still wonder how much resolution you think you can actually get into your negatives. Under laboratory conditions, good lenses stopped down to f11 might give you 60lp/mm in the center, at the edge it would be much less. 60lp/mm is like 3000ppi, 40lp/mm is like 2000ppi.

If you are not in laboratory conditions, I guess you will have a hard time to get detail into the negatives that a scanner like the V750 cannot resolve. It may not look sharp, but with some USM ... the top scanners will of course show you the grain of the film or tiny scratches, but they cannot expose image details that aren't there, right?

Please folks, prove the contrary :-) The story is of course different for MF and very different for 35mm ...


See here for a big survey on lens resolution :

http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/index1.html

[snuck]

The only problem with this approach is that the Imacon software refuses to export 16 bit TIFFs so if you want to do further work in PS then you are forced to live with a loss of quality. Quite why they think this is acceptable in a professional product is beyond me.

I don't know what Imacon but a few days ago I was scanning in 16 bit TIFFs. It is there, although I don't think it's the default.
Cheers

[Lenny Eiger]

Dave,

We spoke a while back, you were going to send me some things to scan so you could see what the top end scanner can do...

If you are new to large format, I think you need to work on your aesthetics first. You may find that you don't even want to use large format (god forbid) for the long term. I disagree with others that say a consumer flatbed is good enough.

I think your $7000 will just get you a Howtek 4500, better than any consumer flatbed, better than Imacon, just as good as the scanner that WCI, possibly better. Only two that are better, the Premier and the ICG 380.

However, it will take you some time to get it all put together, to figure out how to use the software, etc. Then there's a million PhotoShop tricks you have to unlearn and a few more you have to learn. you need a Wacom tablet. So I'd have to say take your time and pace yourself...

Lenny
EigerStudios
eiger@eigerstudios.com