Page 23 of 32 FirstFirst ... 132122232425 ... LastLast
Results 221 to 230 of 311

Thread: Should I Drum Scan, X1 Flextight Scan, or use the Epson V850 w/Aztek Wet Mount Kit?

  1. #221

    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    4,566

    Re: Should I Drum Scan, X1 Flextight Scan, or use the Epson V850 w/Aztek Wet Mount Ki

    Quote Originally Posted by interneg View Post
    how you can get your Epson to adequately resolve the granularity of HP5?
    With the Epson without stitching... it's only about nailing flatness/focus.

    The X5 resolves 2600 effective with 3000 scans, so 0% MTF at 2600, quite a surprisingly low value for such an expensive machine, and if scanning 4x5" without stitching you have 0% MTF at 1800 or 1700. It is totally impressive for 35mm, but for LF having to stitch to go beyond 1700... after paying $16.000...



    Quote Originally Posted by interneg View Post
    because pixel resolution isn't the simplistic zero-sum game you want it to be. Pixel counts don't mean anything other than a set of arbitrary numbers if the rest of the optical performance isn't there
    Cycles/mm at extintion is a very important metrics describing optical performance, the rest of the optical performance is close related, in this case.



    Quote Originally Posted by interneg View Post
    All that matters is: can a given scan system/ set up deliver a reasonable account of the source negative's granularity at a specified nominal pixel resolution comparable to what I currently work with, such that I should consider investing in a suitable shift/ stitch camera?
    The X5 scans always have around the same 60MPix effective not matering much the format size for regular formats (35mm, 6x9cm, 4x5") (it varies depending on aspect ratio, a longer frame delivers more, 6x12 delivers twice what 6x6, of course).

    Suposing that a lens like the Sigma ART 70mm resolves less than 30MPix effective (may it more?), this would be your limiting factor for 1 shot scanning, the more you shift the more you'll approach that value. The ART has 50lp/mm at 50%MTF.

    But with the DSLR you can stitch crops for "unlimited" performance.

    IMO what math says is that the DSLR will be superior to the X5 if stitching, a practical test should show that.

  2. #222

    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Posts
    300

    Re: Should I Drum Scan, X1 Flextight Scan, or use the Epson V850 w/Aztek Wet Mount Ki

    Quote Originally Posted by interneg View Post
    As a point of fact: for what I want to investigate, the format of the source material is (and should be) irrelevant. All that matters is: can a given scan system/ set up deliver a reasonable account of the source negative's granularity at a specified nominal pixel resolution comparable to what I currently work with, such that I should consider investing in a suitable shift/ stitch camera?
    At the risk of further convincing some people I'm in the pro-Epson / anti-DSLR camp**, since I'm relatively new at this particular aspect of photography, how do you define "delivering a reasonable account of the source negative's granularity at a specified nominal pixel resolution"?

    In short, could you define your terms in a way that A) a novice can decipher and B) aren't apparently subjective? Obviously, you have your personal standard, but I'm curious what it breaks down in a way I could, for example, research on my own. If you already did earlier in this thread, my apologies-- just point me at the post, and I'll be on my way.

    In spite of what some people here believe, I'm genuinely interested in the discussion.

    ** Actually, I am pro-Epson, because at this instant in time, the Epson, with it's limitations, makes the most sense for me personally. But I'm not anti-anything.

  3. #223
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    5,614

    Re: Should I Drum Scan, X1 Flextight Scan, or use the Epson V850 w/Aztek Wet Mount Ki

    Once a scan can reproduce the grain of the film, down to its shape, there’s not much more to be mined. The more it can do this, the less, say, color depth matters.

    An Epson cannot do that. Neither can a digital camera (though at least the grain is visible, if the magnification is sufficient) unless we do microscopy more than macro photography. A drum scanner comes closer.

    But it means that any scan we can currently make is an approximation that can only be evaluated by whether it attains our objectives, in addition to whether the negative and everything we do attains our objectives. If the scan really revealed all of what’s in a negative, we would no longer need that evaluation. So, we are stuck with determining whether that approximation is good enough, given our intentions and constraints.

    We’ve always dealt with this. 4x5 is a compromise compared to 8x10, and medium format is a compromise compared to 4x5. A Sironar N is a compromise compared to a Sironar S. And so it goes. We all have to find the optimum between objectives and constraints.

    For me, the Epson is a reasonable compromise for making 16x20 prints from 4x5 negatives. If I was shooting Velvia, it might struggle (because it can’t reproduce the microscopic dye clouds and there has to have the dynamic range to handle the variability of sensels that integrate groups of dye clouds). If I was making 40x60” prints, it would struggle. I’d have to send it out for a drum scan, or photograph it in sections at high magnification. I know that’s the case because the Epson cannot make scans of 6x7 medium format that meets my 16x20 print requirements, which is why I own a Nikon film scanner. But that is also an approximation.

    We are trying to get all we need, not all that is available, unless we are prepared to spend a fortune in dollars or time or both.

    But if we could scan grain shapes easily (not just making grain sort-of visible), our choices would be focused on other links in the image quality chain. Like lenses, or technique, or film. You know, like we used to when we were using enlargers.

    Rick “remembering arguments about whether this or that enlarger lens was good enough” Denney

  4. #224

    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    4,566

    Re: Should I Drum Scan, X1 Flextight Scan, or use the Epson V850 w/Aztek Wet Mount Ki

    Quote Originally Posted by rdenney View Post
    Once a scan can reproduce the grain of the film, down to its shape, there’s not much more to be mined. The more it can do this, the less, say, color depth matters.

    An Epson cannot do that. Neither can a digital camera (though at least the grain is visible, if the magnification is sufficient) unless we do microscopy more than macro photography. A drum scanner comes closer.
    Yes, but with the drum we have to scan at 8.000dpi hardware, is we scan at 4000dpi then true resolved power (at contrast extintion) may be in the 3400 to 3600 range, and this is not much an improvement for grain compared to the Epson result if the focus is nailed. The drum at 8.000 will make a difference, but a single 8.000dpi 4x5" scan costs many hundreds of dollars.

    What makes a difference in BW grain depiction is illumination, the drum illumination nature is a lot like with condenser enlargers sporting a higher Callier, while flatbeds have a more diffuse illumination like diffuser enlargers, at least it's what I understand. Callier is about taste.




    Quote Originally Posted by rdenney View Post
    For me, the Epson is a reasonable compromise for making 16x20 prints from 4x5 negatives.

    With all the respect, this is a paradigm I oppose. Beyond personal quality requirements there is a lot of "YMMV" in that.

    Many have been judging the Epson 4x5" performance based on scans made in the old V700 bundled holders. As that through-focus resolution graph makes evident, a single 1mm distance drop in the sheet center will lower the resolution to just the half.

    Many have not checked that... belive me, a 1mm drop (or more) in a 4x5" sheet is quite easy to happen, this is 1mm in a 100mm wide plastic foil. Many times an on bed scan with the low res lens may be better because focus it's easy to ensure, or at least we easily detect the curling.

    With the new holders we place the curling up and the ANR glass on the film flattens perfectly the film, this is a major advantage that may just double practical performance, most of the times, so we go from 16x20 to 32x40".


    What happened with Pali's test ? He says he is a "normal guy", but he ckecked focus and he nailed it. He extracted the best possible scan playing the same attention to focus than the one is required when DSLR scanning. The result was that for CN the Epson exactly matched (at pixel-peeping level) what an Scanmate 11000 drum and two Creos. With also perfectly matching color gradation which it was an additional surprise.


    This fact alone may make reconsider some paradigms.

    (Of course for 6x7cm a Nikon 9000 is better than the Epson if the shot is very, very sharp, or if we want to show grain structure, no doubt.)
    _____

    Intoxications:

    Let me add how such paradigms were coined:

    Quote Originally Posted by Sasquatchian View Post
    Your enhancements only accentuate what's shit about that scanner, and, in addition, you completely ignore the horrible gradations produced by the Epson.
    But later Mr Sasquatchian admits that he has not seen an Epson in the last 25years (after 1995, it looks)

    Quote Originally Posted by Sasquatchian View Post
    I'm not really inclined to spend a grand right now to see how Epson's scanners have improved since I last owned own a quarter century ago but I might have to just to see. What I think might be happening is that our friend here has never actually seen anything better...
    And later it may even follow a group trolling...

    But the "normal guy" Pali obtained for CN the same sharpness and the same subtle color gradations in a challenging color gradation shot, being rival machines true top notch.


    _____


    Rigth now, the single concern that remains about the Epson-DSLR for LF is grain depiction, to me LF is not much about grain, but I propose making a proficient collaborative side by side.

    I offer shooting several times a test scene with HP5+ and TMX 4x5" and sending negatives to several people to scan it with drum and dslr (one shot and stitching), then we may compare grain from V850 vs X5 vs Drum vs DSLR.


    Proposition:

    Scene: Ample SBR with smooth and microcontrasty areas.

    Films: HP5+ and TMX (what I've at hand).

    Developers: Xtol and HC-110, totalling 4 sheets per scanner.

    Schedule: Juliet


    Do we go?
    Last edited by Pere Casals; 30-May-2020 at 18:41.

  5. #225
    Peter De Smidt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Fond du Lac, WI, USA
    Posts
    8,955

    Re: Should I Drum Scan, X1 Flextight Scan, or use the Epson V850 w/Aztek Wet Mount Ki

    Dealing with grain is highly scanner dependent. For example, I used to own both a consumer flatbed and a Nikon Coolscan. The Coolscan absolutely obliterated the flatbed, at least it did with fine-grained film. The resolution, color, tonality were all significantly better. This, by the way, is a reason why many people don't like Epson flatbeds. Back in the 90s and early 2000s, most people were scanning 35mm film, and Epson scanners were clearly inferior to a lot of other options. People who've been scanning a long time remember this, and they see similar differences when looking at drum-scanned film versus and Epson. This isn't legitimately controversial. As film size goes up to 8x10, the Epsons do a much better job. But, as I said, this applies to fine-grained film. With grainy film, say Kodak HIE (high speed infrared), my consumer flatbed trounced my Nikon. With the Nikon, the grain was huge, easily twice as big as the flatbed scan. This just shows that not all of us need the same attributes in a scanner. Rendering grain well, in my experience, mostly comes down to limiting grain growth in the scan. With my scanner, I've tested a wide range of resolutions, and with it, a Cezanne, grain gets progressively finer as resolution increases, right up to 6000 spi. So, for 35mm film, especially grainy film, that's what I scan at. It's more important for grainy film than for fine-grained film, as I said. Now this is also true for larger film, but I don't print large enough for it to be a big deal. Yes, I could scan LF film in 6000spi strips and combine. It isn't hard. I've done it a few times for fun, but for editing and storage, it's a pain, and so I don't do it.
    Last edited by Peter De Smidt; 29-May-2020 at 07:12.
    “You often feel tired, not because you've done too much, but because you've done too little of what sparks a light in you.”
    ― Alexander Den Heijer, Nothing You Don't Already Know

  6. #226

    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    4,566

    Re: Should I Drum Scan, X1 Flextight Scan, or use the Epson V850 w/Aztek Wet Mount Ki

    At least since 2006, color conversion is also the reason why many people like the Epson flatbeds, like Nick Carver explains. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9d8BukUgzI min 22:00

    But this is irrelevant because with modern tools like 3D LUT Creator one makes with color what he wants.

    I agree with Carver that the Epson has one of best CN inversions around straight from the scanning, IMO only Frontiers and Noritsus are better, but this after applying Image intelligence auto edition.

    Anyway I think that with the right edition tools one may get the same from Drum or DSLR.


    The "Horrible" Epson color inversion and lack of gradation was another fake paradigm that had no base comming from intoxication. It is exactly the counter: one of the best and most pleasing CN inversions around.


    This Nick's Tube explaining Epson operation has today 261.000 views, it looks that many people are interested in operating the Epson, for several reasons. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qtpmlEeJodw



    For the record (not everybody thinks Epson colors are bad):

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	SP32-20200529-163356.jpg 
Views:	11 
Size:	26.6 KB 
ID:	204257
    Last edited by Pere Casals; 29-May-2020 at 07:38.

  7. #227

    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Posts
    300

    Re: Should I Drum Scan, X1 Flextight Scan, or use the Epson V850 w/Aztek Wet Mount Ki

    Quote Originally Posted by Pere Casals View Post
    At least since 2006, color is also the reason why many people like the Epson flatbeds, like Nick Carver explains. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9d8BukUgzI

    But this is irrelevant because with modern tools like 3D LUT Creator one makes with color what he wants. A novelist may blame the keyboard, but's Shakespeare had none.
    Strictly speaking, Carver liked the Epson's colors mostly because of SilverFast with negafix-- which in spite of the cool name, just seems to be some very carefully crafted color curves for remapping the negative's color correctly. If you're good at color curves (I'm not), it can be duplicated with effort.

    The professional lab with a drum scanner does alright with color as well, but they're using their profile(s), rather than the user's, and I have no idea if they take a particular emulsion's color cast into account or not-- I would hope they do.

    The DSLR, as a rule, wants to impose it's own rendition of color-- Fuji, Canon, Olympus, Sony-- they all have their own interpretation of how a set of 4 numbers should be interpreted as a color. As you say, if you have the time and patience to create custom LUTs, that can be compensated for as well.

  8. #228

    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    4,566

    Re: Should I Drum Scan, X1 Flextight Scan, or use the Epson V850 w/Aztek Wet Mount Ki

    Quote Originally Posted by grat View Post
    As you say, if you have the time and patience to create custom LUTs, that can be compensated for as well.

    The "Dark Art" of Scanner Profiling : https://luminous-landscape.com/the-d...ner-profiling/
    Last edited by Pere Casals; 29-May-2020 at 12:08.

  9. #229
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    5,614

    Re: Should I Drum Scan, X1 Flextight Scan, or use the Epson V850 w/Aztek Wet Mount Ki

    Vuescan had always done an okay job of inverting color negative scans for me. I use it for the Epson and for the Nikon.

    I do have scanner calibration targets and have attempted to build a scanner profile, which has worked better in the Nikon than in the Epson, just because of the size of the target. Vuescan will create scanner profiles from IT8 targets, too.

    Rick "noting that the target supplied with Silverfast SE bundled with the scanner was reflective only" Denney

  10. #230

    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    4,566

    Re: Should I Drum Scan, X1 Flextight Scan, or use the Epson V850 w/Aztek Wet Mount Ki

    Silverfast Negafix advantage is that it has specific maps for each film, accounting for the C-41 <--> RA-4 specific spectral interaction, an inversion not considering the specific film may require a more complex color edition later to obtain a sound result.

    _________________________________



    Silverfast guys say that now the V800/850 reaches 4.08D with multiexposure in Version 8. Is this because of the new LED illumination ? Is it true ? Until recently they stated 3.38D !

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	SP32-20200529-220348.jpg 
Views:	3 
Size:	31.7 KB 
ID:	204269

    I was noticing something "abnormal" with velvia in the V850, hmmm...

    It would be better if this was false, because if it's true...

Similar Threads

  1. How to use Epson V850 to scan contact prints for website use
    By Hugo Zhang in forum Digital Processing
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 9-May-2019, 17:29
  2. Epson V850 scan with 100% crop
    By Steven Ruttenberg in forum Digital Hardware
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 9-Nov-2018, 13:15
  3. scanning speed of V700 vs V850 using epson scan
    By Chester McCheeserton in forum Digital Hardware
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 1-Apr-2018, 14:50
  4. Epson v750 vs drum scan
    By spkennedy3000 in forum Digital Processing
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 8-Jan-2012, 10:38
  5. macbook, V750, epson scan, scan speed
    By walter23 in forum Digital Processing
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 7-Mar-2008, 03:07

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
  •