Advice on scanning negatives

[hnaa]

OK,
a question here about scanning 4x5 negatives. As I understand it, some people rely on good quality flatbed scanners, due to the size of the 4x5 negative/slide, what is your take on this? The other options, for me, are toget it scanned professionally, which cost about 35$/slide here in Denmark (ouch), or, there is a do-it-yourself lab, where you can have access to an Imacon Flextight 848 at about 10$ an hour. Now, I know that if you're shooting 35mm film, then a dedicated filmscanner is the way to go, but how about 4x5? It seems there are (as always) a lot of conflicting opinions out there. And obviously getting superb quality is a goal, otherwise I would shoot something easier than 4x5.

[sully75]

I've had good results bordering on really good with a relatively cheap Epson 4870 and a better-scanning.com film holder, doing 4x5 and 5x7 black and white. I haven't scanned color LF but scanning 35mm slides was a pleasure, the digital ICE worked really amazingly.

I have a little more than $200 into the scanner and the holder and I feel pretty good about what I'm able to do with it. I've made great prints at 13x19. Nothing bigger but if you have the budget for bigger, buy a better scanner!

All the stuff on my flickr page was done with this rig.

$35 is crazy unless you are publishing something or printing a huge poster (in my opinion).

Paul

[rjbuzzclick]

I'm still facing this dilemma as my current scanner only does up to 120 roll film. I can't justify the cost of a new scanner for 4x5. My solution is to do simple contact prints with a light bulb, and then scan the contact prints on a my flatbed. I don't have a darkroom per se, just a dark room.

[Lars Daniel]

The short version: Get an Epson V700/V750 and be done with it.

[Peter De Smidt]

How big of enlargements do you want to make, and what type of film will you be scanning?

[Martin Miksch]

Go with the Imacon, take some film and invest 1 hour of training and 2 or 3 for scanning.
Regards
Martin

[El Topo]

The short version: Get an Epson V700/V750 and be done with it.

+1. I'm also starting in LF these days, but I have an Epson V750 Pro with better scanning mounting for my medium format negatives and I am extremely pleased with it. I've done 10x10 prints with outstanding quality. I expect a lot from this machine when I have my first 4x5's......

[hnaa]

I am just startint out with 4x5,
but I guess I will be shooting Velvia, Ektachrome, and the new Kodak Ektar, which is supposed to be great for scanning. About the Epson V750, I can see that, for the price of one of these (in Denmark) I can pay for about 100 hours at the Imacon scanner... Maybe that is the way to go.

[Tobias Key]

The problem with this kind of thing is that what is superb quality for one person for is not quite good enough for another. I've on just started in LF but I've shot medium format for years and have owned both a Epson 4990 and now an HP G4050. For me both of these scanners are easily beaten by an Imacon scan from the lab that I use so I used them both only for proofing to decide which images I wanted to get scanned properly.

Another thing to remember is to put a price on your time. Scanning and spotting can be very time consuming and frustrating if you think you scanner is almost but not *quite* up to the task. If $35 saves you a few hours of your time and gives you a better result it might not be as expensive as you think.

Thirdly, my local lab gives a hefty discount on scanning prices (around 50% I think) if you ask for uncleaned scans - why not ask your lab if they'll give you a discount if you spot the files yourself?

[mortensen]

Hi.
I live in copenhagen and have been shooting 4x5 for a year and use the Imacon service you refer to (fotografisk center - it's actually only $7 an hour, if you buy ten hours!).
I have neither tried the Epson nor a drum scanner, but using Fotografisk Centers Imacon, I can scan 10 4x5 negs in an hour and output 420mb 16bit files from each neg. I have just had my first ink-jet prints done, including a 80x100cm from one of these files. You can't scrutinize it with a loupe and find additional detail, but it reveals quite remarkable detail even from 10-15cm distance. If you saw the Olaf Otto Becker exhibition last winter, his cotton prints from 8x10 negs were of course better and more detailed than what I just got - but it's not two different worlds (well, his compositions and subjects are, haha). I you have seen Walter Niedermayer's currently exhibited prints at DAC (the SANAA exhibition), they are destinctively less detailed than what I got... and they are bigger, too - i know

The Imacon FT848 further gives you the oppurtunity of scanning at 3200spi if you use the 6x17 holder. You have to scan twice and stitch for each neg (which sucks a bit, of course), but it is an option, if you need to print extra large. I am aware, that people using drum scanners will say that the Imacon does not reveal detail comparable to a 4000/8000spi drum scan, but at $0.7 a scan, the price is hard to beat. I chose not to invest $500 in an epson and until now, I have probably used around 1200-1600DKR ($200-260) on scanning - and I have scanned a lot!

Last but not least, beware that the iMac at Fotografisk Center SUCKS - colors are totally off and inconsistant across the screen! You also have the option of using SPARK gallery in Jægersborggade, nørrebro. Same scanner, same price, not too flexible opening hours.

PM me if you want to see original files etc.

... where did you get the $35/scan offer? For drum scans, I've only seen prices around $200 (1000DKR) a scan...