Epson v750...worth it?

[carlcreux]

I make fine B&W prints from 6x6, 6x9 and 8x10 negs on 8x10 warmtone FB then scan at 300dpi in an ok flatbed scanner, then print with an epson 2400 onto various media. Will this scanner produce files as good as or better...the 120 negs are my main concern.
Thanks anyone!!
Carl

[rdenney]

I make fine B&W prints from 6x6, 6x9 and 8x10 negs on 8x10 warmtone FB then scan at 300dpi in an ok flatbed scanner, then print with an epson 2400 onto various media. Will this scanner produce files as good as or better...the 120 negs are my main concern.

When you scan the negative, you are adopting a software-based work flow, using something like Photoshop to perform your manipulations such as dodging and burning in and contrast control. That process has considerably more power than what you can do under an enlarger, and perhaps that power is something you seek. But the learning curve is steep. That is the overriding decision. If you want to perform your print-making magic in the computer, then you'll get far better results starting with a scan of the negative rather than using an intermediate print. But if that intermediate print contains all your magic and you don't want to learn how to perform that work on the computer, then scanning the negatives directly won't do--you'll be forced to work in the computer.

The reason it will be better is that you lose tonal information and dynamic range when making a print, and then when you scan the print, you'll have another generational loss of tonal variation. And scanning at 300 dpi will limit you to prints of the same size as your 8x10 intermediate print.

The V750 is capable of something between 2000 and 2400 pixels/inch of real information, and with 6x6 that will give you a file of about 5000 pixels square. Raw math would suggest a print of 20x20" at 240 pixels/inch of print. But the scanner can't quite live up to that with some visible reduction in image quality. The Epson will support prints of excellent quality to about 4 or 5 times the size of the negative, and of good quality to about an 8x enlargement. So, you can expect the best results up to an 10x10" print from 6x6, or 10x15" from 6x9, and still get really good results up to maybe twice that. I don't think your R2400 printer is likely to take you where that scanner will not go.

You'll test the scanner's capabilities with film that small, and you'll need to make sure that the film holder is positioned perfectly to achieve the best focus.

Do not expect to match the quality contact prints from 8x10 negatives, of course. And do not expect R2400 prints to have the same look as your gelatin silver prints. You knew that already, of course, from your current work. But if you learn Photoshop or some other good image editing software, you'll have more capabilities for image management than was possible with your previous work-flow. If that 8x10 darkroom print represents your vision accurately and you scan only for, say, web display, you might not see any benefit. If the prints from the R2400 are the end product, then scanning the negative directly will provide improvement.

There are those who print intermediate "digital" negatives in place of your fiber print, and then use those digital negatives to produce alternative-process prints such as carbon prints. But that's a whole different thing than what you described, and the alternative print has to bring something so good that it overcomes the generational losses.

Rick "whose 4x5 scans from a V750 produce 16x20 prints that are as good as and usually better than anything produced on similar paper in the darkroom" Denney

[lenicolas]

hi,
I don't get your question.
Are you asking if epson v750 will do as good a job scanning negs than the scan you use now to scan prints?

I guess it widely depends on how you print, and what scanner you use...

[carlcreux]

Thanks all!
My main product is a silver gelatin print, that's what I sell. But I need to make digital files so that I can create other products from that image...from web to 16x20 posters. I need a digital file that will print the same quality ( or better!) on my epson 2400 as my gelatin print. I have a thousands of B&W negs that I want to access, but I haven't got the time to print them up to fine prints and then scan them, I just want to scan the negs. I am happy to Photoshop. I just need to know if the v750 is good enough for the job...I haven't been able to test one and see any results...I just hate buying a piece of equipment that some people say is brilliant but when I see the results think it's terrible ! I've read all the reviews I can find, some positive some very negative...some say its only good for reflectives...poor for negs.
Thanks all again, any more info greatly appreciated!
Carl

[Bob McCarthy]

If your trying to replicate the look and tone of the silver print, scan the print and work to replicate it.

If the negative has more potential, then scanning the film and editing in a editor may improve the product as dodging, burning, selective contrast control is far more flexable and powerful in photoshop compared to waving under the enlarger light.

Might make a better product and can be printed digitally or used to make a digital negative for the darkroom.

bob

[Ben Syverson]

16x20 is not a poster... It's a small print, and a very small enlargement from 4x5. The v750 is almost overkill for 16x20.

[Lenny Eiger]

I make fine B&W prints from 6x6, 6x9 and 8x10 negs on 8x10 warmtone FB then scan at 300dpi in an ok flatbed scanner, then print with an epson 2400 onto various media. Will this scanner produce files as good as or better...the 120 negs are my main concern.
Thanks anyone!!
Carl

There is much more information in a negative than in a darkroom print. For 120 film, I would try a film scanner or a drum. You might to be able to rent one at a place near you, or you can have someone do a professional scan or two. Then you will know what is possible.

Your question has so many extra variables in it, it's impossible for any of us to answer it fully. Test it out for yourself...

Lenny

[jim kitchen]

Will this scanner produce files as good as or better...

Dear carlcreux,

The Epson 750 will produce a scan that you might be proud of, but the film must be flat when you scan, and since the smaller Epson film holders fail miserably with keeping the roll film negatives flat you will struggle with consistent results. That said, there are incremental tools that can help you with film flatness during a scan, but I would really do what Lenny Eiger suggests first. You should seek out a source that has an Epson 750, a source that can drum scan, and a source that might be able to scan your negatives with another film scanner suited for your smaller negatives. Unfortunately, it could be a lengthy process to locate a facility or a group of facilities that could accomplish this for you, but ultimately you will be the judge of the results and you will deem what is acceptable, but only through experimentation and, or validation.

You will see a noticeable variance among the negative's results, as the negatives are scanned by each device... :)

jim k

[Marc B.]

Carl, I have an idea, and if I were more experienced with scanning I would scan some negatives for you. This is something that other members here might be willing to do for you. If others would let you send them a sampling of images to scan, with return postage included, they could scan your images to disk, then send your film and disk back to you. This way you would see first hand how a v750 would resolve your own images.
Hopefully someone with a v750 will take this idea, and run with it for you.

[pdmoylan]

In a recent marathon of scanning 200+ 4x5 chromes and negatives on the V750, I confirm that keeping film flat with the standard holders is a challenge. A larger bug was extreme contrast and oversaturated images using Silverfast which I found difficult to adjust in Photoshop at times. If I changed the profile to Landscape those problems occasionally were corrected. Otherwise adjustments in both Silverfast and Photoshop afterwards were necessary, not always with desired results. Others have mentioned using Epson Scan to manage this problem. See comparison scanner test in LFP posts to see how the V750 matches in resolution to drum and other flatbed scanners.

I then printed many 16x20, 20x24 and 24x30 Chromira prints and compared them side by side to Aztec Premier drum scanned prints from the same Chromira printer. Setting aside color differences, I found that the v750 results were not unreasonable but for images larger than 16x20, they did not have that crisp resolution appearance of the drum scans. Details tended to be muddied at larger sizes. I do find that I obtain better results with overscanning (i.e. larger files than would be calculated as necessary). Others have disagreed with this procedure but it works for me.

[James Olson]

I just got the v700 scannner and I scan 4x5 and 6x9 and 35mm. I use Epson scan and find the results are much better than I anticipated. This is my first scanner so I am a novice . I did have several test prints made and they were awesome. Largest I printed was 16x20
Jim Olson

[David Higgs]

I've been using the scanner for a year now - theres a learning curve and I'm finding new techniques that has led me to rescan slides/negs that I originally did at the start.

I've found a lot depends on the image, some negs are just easy to scan. B+W negs I've found the easiest with a huge latitude - you end up throwing information away to make a decent print. Colour neg is similar but I'm having colour balance issues as I'm on the base of the curve for that one. Colour reversal is harder, depending a lot on the subject matter but blacks get muddy, the scan always gives you quite a flat image and you'll need to get good at postprocessing to get the most out of the scanner.

It goes without saying that to print large the negatives have to be good in the first place. My most disappointing 20 inch print, is soft on the neg - not due to the scanner. Its one of those 'one that got away' pictures.

I have no issue going to 16x20 using 6x9, and 4x5. Above that - 4x5 is best, but some 6x9s can take it. In your post you mention 16x20 'posters' - well thats not a stretch for the 750 on 4x5, and if its a good 6x9 still no problem.

[Jim Noel]

No!

[David Higgs]

Get off the fence Jim say what you mean!

I can get one V750 for the price of 4.5 drum scans where I am....