Epson V700 Issue

[Clement Apffel]

Yes, I tried it myself by downloading your samples and by sharpening them on PS.

There is no discution at all on your example.

the thing is that I still don't see it on my tests here at home on my scanner.

thanks for sharing.

EDIT :

... I would still love to see a scanner that delivers 2800 optical resolutin at 3200 setting ... for under 1000 euro ...

But none of the above can deny the beatuy of your photo

We cross-posted. That was my point when saying I did not agree with 2100 dpi optical res value. Actually I still don't.
But what I now know thanks to Ken Lee is that my scanner can make better scans than those I currently get.

[asd]

Here come to my other questions...

Why did Epson design V700 in the way that we need to adjust the height of film holder in order to get sharp scanner? We even need to spend money to buy third party film holder!

Why is the scan not sharp (out of focus) when we lay the film on the scanner glass? When we scan 8x10" or odd size film, such as 6x9 or 6x17, how can we focus correctly?

[Paul H]

Here come to my other questions...

Why did Epson design V700 in the way that we need to adjust the height of film holder in order to get sharp scanner? We even need to spend money to buy third party film holder!

To cover sample variations I suppose. I manage quite happily without the third party holder - if I need something "extra" to keep the film flat (like some curly Efke film), I use a piece of anti-reflective glass cut to fit in the film slot (120). I lay the film in the channel, with the glass on top. Works fine.

Why is the scan not sharp (out of focus) when we lay the film on the scanner glass? When we scan 8x10" or odd size film, such as 6x9 or 6x17, how can we focus correctly?

You have two settings for scanning film - "Film - with film area guide", and "Film - with film holder". The first is for scanning film on the scanner glass, the second uses the second lens that focuses about the scanner glass.

[Clement Apffel]

Here again, the answer is quite simple:

Epson made it this way to lower production costs and retail price.
To my knowledge there is no focusing device on Epson V700 series. Just like on the 4000 series.
Focusing device would have added 1000$ to the retail price.

But why don’t they provide holders that are in the sharp area of their scanner? You’ll ask.

On a production line, it is quite hard to manufacture scanners that are all focused at the exact same distance. Here too, it would have added 1000$ to the retail price.
So the holders provided with the scanner have a height that is set on the average focus distance of a batch of scanners.

That is why some scanners can provide quite ok scans with standard holders while others will provide blurred scans. And that is why when purchasing a height adjustable holder you will have different height setting than those I’ll set on my scanner even though it is the same brand and model.

Concerning the 2 lens settings:
I think the on-glass lens is studied to scan print. So the optical resolution could be lower than the other lens setting.
I’d be careful with on-glass scanning.

[mandoman7]

I was on the verge of buying one of the betterscanning outfits, but went through the testing procedure with the 4x5 holder, scanning small segments at different heights. One of the settings was clearly better and has performed well enough for me for the time being, 4x5 film being flat by nature. Not using the liquid mounting has motivated me to clean up my processing methods so that my negs are now drying fairly spot free.

The 120 holder though, has no chance of holding film flat or at the right height. For those I've had better results placing them on the flatbed under a piece of AN glass to hold it flat, but the results haven't been exactly inspiring. I'm more inclined to shoot to the scanner's strengths of 4x5 or 8x10 as a result.

For me, the big advantage this scanner has provided has been the ability to quickly scan and review the results of the day's shooting which is significant. That's something I've been missing for a long time, losing my darkroom 10 yrs. ago. As a result, I'm back into daily shooting and processing of LF negatives, making proof sheets and plans for future sessions.

I expect that there's a fair likelihood that I will want a better scanner down the road, but for now I can at least shoot and see how its going without a monthly lab bill.


JY

[Jon Middleton]

Hi, All. New to the forum, and a new V700 owner. I bought it to catalog my 3000 Kodachrome slides, but have scanned my 4x5 transparencies and some 120 film. Not thrilled with the results, but a lot of it is film height, bowing, etc. I plan to keep using the Epson film holders for cataloging purposes, but need a better method for critical scanning.

So, I'm considering fluid mount scanning. Seems like the easiest thing to do, just a bit of fluid, then film, then mylar, then a mask, and scan.

Questions:

1) Does anyone here do this?

2) Can you just put a piece of glass over a 4x5 sheet of film and scan, with similar results?

3) Any alternatives to Kami solution that are more widely available? I'm thinking of using baby oil as a test fluid, to see if fluid mounting makes a difference. The shipping on Kami fluid is standard UPS + $20 for hazardous material fees. Ridiculous.

I am familiar with the Epson V750 FMA, and betterscanning.com's products, but it seems that mounting directly to the platten should work as well. Is this correct?

I'm exciting about the ability to scan, as now I can use my Zone VI 4x5 and C330 more. And Yashica 124G Mat.

[Doug Fisher]

Try ordering Kami from Pitman Graphics. I found it was a lot cheaper and they did not charge high shipping costs.

Doug
---
www.BetterScanning.com

[Jan Becket]

There's probably not a lot of real difference between this and Kami, but I've been happy with Scan Science Lumina optical mounting fluid. After the scan, it air dries in a couple of minutes - no cleanup necessary. I'm using it on Doug Fisher's V700 carrier, BTW - a nice combo, until those Imacon prices drop by 3/4.

[Jon Middleton]

Thanks. I was hoping for a more reasonably priced fluid. The Lumina is $25/8 oz, which is a lot more than the Kami at $33/liter. I called Pitman yesterday, but they could not quote shipping charges. I have some mineral oil on hand, which I'd be willing to try if cleanup isn't too much trouble. At least that would give me an idea if fluid mounting is worth the effort.

[Jon Middleton]

So, I called Pitman today. Freight is $10.50 plus $23 Hazmat fee. So, more in shipping than a liter of Kami fluid costs ($32.75).

I did a test today, and mounted a 4x5 transparency to the scanner bed with mineral oil, with acetate over the top. It really wasn't that messy, which is the good news. The bad news is that it didn't make much difference. In fact, no improvement in scan quality. Strange, because I was able to get the film exactly the way I wanted it, which was nice and flat on the platen. The mineral oil doesn't evaporate, so it was easy to take my time to get it just right. What gives?

Also, I was in a custom photo lab today, and they use the V700 for 4X5 scanning. They recommend using the scanner USM on high. Is that right? I have been using no scanner sharpening, and doing it all in PS.