Not that I can afford an IQSmart or IQDumb for that matters, but I would be interested in comparison for C-41 4x5 Portra on V7xx vs. anything else.
I have done drum scans on 2 negatives and printed them to 4 by 5 feet and they look great. The greatest difference is the shadow details and more tonal values. Resolution wise the drum scan is definitely better also
IQDumb Lol RichardThanks for the laugh - this thread needed it.
I am making some test scans but starting with Epson and Eversmart Pro for B&W. I went through the headache to setup the Epson so will try to make some color and drum comparisons in the future but it might take a little while. Will post at least the starting point tests tonight.
Fingers crossed that I don't get accused for not knowing how to scan but I think the effort is worth the debate.
Pali
1600, 2500, and 4000 DPI resolution tests
Focus calibrated Epson V700 and straight negative on the Eversmart Pro test target scans. Starting foundation for the comparison is potentially the best case for Epson which is B&W and relative low 1600 DPI setting.
Epson V700 - Vuescan 1600 DPI - 16 BIT Tiff 2 Sample Scan - No Adjustments - Inverted in Photoshop
Eversmart Pro - 1600 DPI Scan - 8 BIT Tiff - No Adjustments - Inverted in Photoshop
Epson V700 2500 DPI
ES Pro 2500 DPI
Epson V700 4000 DPI
ES Pro 4000 DPI
Full resolution JPEGS here. LINK
Argue all you want but please at least enjoy my awesome test target.
Pali
You have an awesome test target !!!Originally Posted by Pali K
Let's to argue something:
ES Pro at 4000 DPI scan has a bit more granularity comming from "in hardware" digital sharpening, I guess, if you take PS and apply sharpening to the V700 scan until you see the same granularity they will match.
Also both, at 4000 dpi, they are beyond their optical performance, anyway oversampling beyond optical resolution is useful, as sampling do not introduce more degradation.
By my tests done many years ago (and I have 0 interest in revisiting them), the ES Pro is actually resolving grain which the 700 is not capable of. Adding sharpening to the 700 will not match as it sharpens mush into grain clumps.ES Pro at 4000 DPI scan has a bit more granularity comming from "in hardware" digital sharpening
Thanks,
Kirk
at age 73:
"The woods are lovely, dark and deep,
But I have promises to keep,
And miles to go before I sleep,
And miles to go before I sleep"
Portra 160
Looking datasheet page 11 it is not a very hi-res film, for portraits you seek not a very high resolution, but other things, it reach some 50 cycles/mm at 50% modulation transfer, so 2400 dpi may be more than correct to extract all optical information. Beyond 2400 dpi you are oversampling, not bad, but sterile.
Please look this 6x7 shot, scanned with a V750 that it's exactly the same than V700
http://www.paulbohman.com/blog/2011/...rtrait-camera/
http://www.paulbohman.com/blog/2011/...ak-portra-160/
I'm in love with those portraits... Portra 160 is a superb thing.... how I love it !!!!! DSLRs will need a century to match... at least 20 years from now. Only Fuji 160 can rival it.
Is Ektar 100 a more high-res film? I have "standardized" on Portra 160 and 400 since I am doing 3 portrait projects, but I do shoot landscape and other stuff occasionally. May be I should start a separate thread, but for 4x5 Color Neg scanning, if size, weight, and convenience of use are all factors e.g. drum may be least convenient to use and an IQSmart may be too heavy (130 lbs!!!), then wouldn't something like the V7xx/V8xx be the best low cost solution and something like the Flextight X1/X5 be the best high end solution?
I mean I can dream to own a Flextight, but a 130/200 lbs machine is just a bit much to consider...
IQsmart weighs 77 pounds. 130 (approx) is shipping weight. Eversmart on the other hand (well, make that two or three other hands - it's bigger and heavier.)
I see... I already have a behemoth (Epson 7900), so another beast, if if I have dough, is probably out
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks