Page 8 of 17 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 162

Thread: Scanner Comparison 2019 [Epson Flatbed | Eversmart Flatbed | Drum Scanners]

  1. #71

    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    4,480

    Re: Scanner Comparison 2019 [Epson Flatbed | Eversmart Flatbed | Drum Scanners]

    Quote Originally Posted by Randy Moe View Post
    It's too big!
    Randy, that pdf is for lenses, not for scanners or microscopes. For that search ebay: usaf 1951 glass slide, you may offer some $50. Those are not perfect, but my cheap one is very good until 200 lp/mm

  2. #72
    Tin Can's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    13,593

    Re: Scanner Comparison 2019 [Epson Flatbed | Eversmart Flatbed | Drum Scanners]

    Thanks Pere!

    Quote Originally Posted by Pere Casals View Post
    Randy, that pdf is for lenses, not for scanners or microscopes. For that search ebay: usaf 1951 glass slide, you may offer some $50. Those are not perfect, but my cheap one is very good until 200 lp/mm
    sin eater

  3. #73

    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Location
    Guelph, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    292

    Re: Scanner Comparison 2019 [Epson Flatbed | Eversmart Flatbed | Drum Scanners]

    If this is the tool to use for evaluating a scanner, then can we also use it to evaluate a "camera scanner"?

    With my current camera scanning setup, I'm pretty sure it's not worth looking for much more than around 2,666 ppi (as a function of all the limitations of the system). I can get 2,666 ppi with 12 frames. To get 3,000 ppi takes 20 frames -- so for a modest increase in resolution, a lot more work.

    I've been judging by comparing "scans" of actual 4x5 negatives at different resolutions. But if I wanted to be more precise, would this tool do the trick?

    As an aside, either Edmunds Optics is ripping off the language they use to describe their much more expensive USAF 1951 glass slide from the Chinese eBay sellers, or the other way around... I suspect the other way around.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pere Casals View Post
    Randy, that pdf is for lenses, not for scanners or microscopes. For that search ebay: usaf 1951 glass slide, you may offer some $50. Those are not perfect, but my cheap one is very good until 200 lp/mm

  4. #74
    Tin Can's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    13,593

    Re: Scanner Comparison 2019 [Epson Flatbed | Eversmart Flatbed | Drum Scanners]

    Yes that's more than I want to spend. One is expensive and the copy seems far less value for the price.

    I plan to try reduction negatives.

    As I fiddle about!

    Quote Originally Posted by rdeloe View Post
    If this is the tool to use for evaluating a scanner, then can we also use it to evaluate a "camera scanner"?

    With my current camera scanning setup, I'm pretty sure it's not worth looking for much more than around 2,666 ppi (as a function of all the limitations of the system). I can get 2,666 ppi with 12 frames. To get 3,000 ppi takes 20 frames -- so for a modest increase in resolution, a lot more work.

    I've been judging by comparing "scans" of actual 4x5 negatives at different resolutions. But if I wanted to be more precise, would this tool do the trick?

    As an aside, either Edmunds Optics is ripping off the language they use to describe their much more expensive USAF 1951 glass slide from the Chinese eBay sellers, or the other way around... I suspect the other way around.
    sin eater

  5. #75
    Peter De Smidt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Fond du Lac, WI, USA
    Posts
    7,277

    Re: Scanner Comparison 2019 [Epson Flatbed | Eversmart Flatbed | Drum Scanners]

    Quote Originally Posted by rdeloe View Post
    If this is the tool to use for evaluating a scanner, then can we also use it to evaluate a "camera scanner"?

    With my current camera scanning setup, I'm pretty sure it's not worth looking for much more than around 2,666 ppi (as a function of all the limitations of the system). I can get 2,666 ppi with 12 frames. To get 3,000 ppi takes 20 frames -- so for a modest increase in resolution, a lot more work.

    I've been judging by comparing "scans" of actual 4x5 negatives at different resolutions. But if I wanted to be more precise, would this tool do the trick?

    As an aside, either Edmunds Optics is ripping off the language they use to describe their much more expensive USAF 1951 glass slide from the Chinese eBay sellers, or the other way around... I suspect the other way around.
    This has already been talked about in this thread. Yes, you can use a USAF1951 target with a camera-based scanner. The real problem is correlating the results with real-world film scans. When I developed my DSLR scanner, I tried all sorts of lenses, from an old 55 micro Nikkor to a 5x Nikon Measuring Microscope lens. The higher magnifications gave much better results with an Edmunds chrome-on-glass high resolution USAF1951 target, but I did a comparison using a 35mm Kodak Technical pan negative. The image was shot using a very good prime lens at it's ideal aperture. I used a cable release, mirror lock up, and a 20lbs tripod. This system should've given higher resolution than that achievable with large format film, at least without a NASA-level budget. The result, with my system, shooting at 2x magnification might've given a tiny bit more detail than at 1x....but I couldn't be sure there even was a difference, even at %400 on my screen. Yes, I used lenses optimized for each magnification. So, the added hassle of going to 2x did not make sense, at least with my system, even though the test slide showed clearly better results.
    Last edited by Peter De Smidt; 18-Jan-2019 at 15:41.
    Please stop feeding the trolls.

  6. #76

    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    15

    Re: Scanner Comparison 2019 [Epson Flatbed | Eversmart Flatbed | Drum Scanners]

    Quote Originally Posted by Pali K View Post
    Thank you Ropel, Peter and Sandy. And the additional benefit of a DSLR setup is that it will only get better as technology continues to improve. I don't shoot any digital and my last DSLR was a 5D MKII which I don't think would be much helpful to include. I don't even have a proper lens for it to do justice even for a 10 year old camera.

    Pali
    Thank you all for responding to my suggestion. Encouraging reminder to start working on a DSLR setup myself.

  7. #77

    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    4,480

    Re: Scanner Comparison 2019 [Epson Flatbed | Eversmart Flatbed | Drum Scanners]

    Quote Originally Posted by rdeloe View Post
    If this is the tool to use for evaluating a scanner, then can we also use it to evaluate a "camera scanner"?
    Yes... of course. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1951_U...ion_test_chart

    You need an slide resolving Group 7, or less if your scanner is not a drum. For a drum you may make a contact copy of the glass slide on Adox CMS 20 film, so it can be wet mounted in the cylinder.

    If you have a camera scanner the it would be useful to check focus, so you would see: the quantitative effect of a focus shift, and the sweet aperture point, and average best setting. You may even want to stop the lens beyond the sweet point to increase DOF if you have a curled negative, I guess.

    But, think anyway that it's really difficult that a LF negative has much information beyond 50 lp/mm, this is Group/Element 5.5

    For rolls, some selected shots (non handheld, etc) may clearly benefit from a better scanning.

  8. #78

    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Location
    Guelph, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    292

    Re: Scanner Comparison 2019 [Epson Flatbed | Eversmart Flatbed | Drum Scanners]

    Thanks Pere and Peter for confirming what I suspected. It makes sense, of course.

    As if often the case, the danger is that we create a solution looking for a problem! I already find prints up to 17" wide to be be pleasingly "big" for me. With my current setup I will be able to reliably produce digital version of my 4x5 negs at 2,666 ppi. That would allow for a print of 36"x24" at the Epson "ideal" of 360 ppi. In the unlikely even that I need more -- and the negative can give more -- the occasional drum scan would be more economical.

    Really the only actual problem I have is dealing with large areas of low detail. Stitching these is currently possible in my setup only with a lot of manual intervention. Peter's computer-controlled approach seems to have solved that problem nicely, but I'm not prepared to go there yet. Should that ever become a significant barrier to completing a project, I'll probably have to spring for a V750 or V850....

  9. #79
    Pali K Pali K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    MD, USA
    Posts
    1,343

    Re: Scanner Comparison 2019 [Epson Flatbed | Eversmart Flatbed | Drum Scanners]

    Quote Originally Posted by Randy Moe View Post
    Again I ask for size of USAF chart you guys are using.

    I do use the big 8.5X11 inch print out Pere referred to earlier. It's too big! Even this blind old man can see all the lines.

    The LaserSoft Imaging SilverFast SilverFast Resolution Target does not specify size or material. Is it a glass 35mm slide?
    Hi Randy, the one I am using is no bigger than 35mm film but it is printed on a wider (almost xpan like) frame. I'll measure it properly and post exact measurements soon but its small enough that I can't see any of the group 6 or 7 lines by eye.

    Pali

  10. #80

    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    4,480

    Re: Scanner Comparison 2019 [Epson Flatbed | Eversmart Flatbed | Drum Scanners]

    I guess this was about spotting the line groups... not the individual lines.

    Human eye may see a bit the individual lines in Group 1.

    Group 2 have lines of around 0.05mm thickness. Whe can see a hair that is 0.07mm, but if two hairs are separated by a hair width then we see a single hair.

    In Group 6 lines are around 0.005mm thick.
    Last edited by Pere Casals; 19-Jan-2019 at 06:18.

Similar Threads

  1. New Epson V800, V850 flatbed scanners
    By Oren Grad in forum Digital Hardware
    Replies: 99
    Last Post: 15-Feb-2016, 08:47
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 27-Sep-2004, 08:59

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •