Quote Originally Posted by Gordon Wood View Post
I was going to start a new thread, but this one seems to address my concerns.
There are lots of posts discussing the merits of various scanners. This one here is about scan software, IMHO not the same thing.

Quote Originally Posted by Gordon Wood View Post
I'm new to 4x5 photography, but have worked a fair amount with MF and 35mm. I have the Epson V700 Perfection, and must say that across the board, I'm quite disappointed.
Even on 4x5's, when I look at the results (scanning in RGB at 2400 dpi in Professional Mode w/Epson Scan software) at 100%, they look soft. I like the 4x5 holders that came with it because they seem to hold the film nice and flat (can't say the same for the other holders), and I've played with the height adjusters, but the results don't hold a candle to the original neg. when examined with a loupe.
Others on this thread seem to have good luck, but I've even had my MF scans rejected by Alamy for being too soft.
Am I expecting too much, or should I be looking at drum scans?
Gordon
Scan files are always an intermediate product. No matter which scan software you use, they always need post-processing. In fact, a good scan almost always looks soft, it just means that most of the information in the film has made it into the digital file. You'll need to fix up the "curves" in your image manipulation program of choice and likely sharpen the image a bit too. Usually due to the scan options introducing softness, I've learned in school that you should always sharpen scans at least a little bit. When downsizing images a lot (e.g. for the web) I sometimes don't see a difference.

Apart from that, those Epsons are neither dedicated film scanners nor drum scanners. Their optics are not up to *that* standard, but for most stuff they are good enough.