Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 42

Thread: Drum Scan vs DSLR vs Epson Scan (From Nick Carver's Youtube Channel)

  1. #31

    Re: Drum Scan vs DSLR vs Epson Scan (From Nick Carver's Youtube Channel)

    When I was first exposed to drum scanning back in the mid 90's, one place where we had scans done in West L.A. had a Hell 3010 scanner. Yeah, on that, it was far more complicated. You never ever saw an image on the screen. The monitor was only to set all the scanning parameters but you had to use this little scope with crosshairs in it to pinpoint and set the ink percentages for white black and gray - and it was all in CMYK as that scanner could only deliver CMYK. So you'd scope the white point and set that to 5C, 3M and 3Y, set the mid tone to 50C, 40M, 40Y and set the black accordingly. You had to KNOW this shit upside down and inside out. It was more expensive to fix it after than to get it right in the scanner. I used to sit with the scanner operator at midnight over on Pico Blvd and tell them the numbers I wanted in my scans. There was no color management then. The scanner was calibrated directly to their proofing system and what you got was what you got from them.

    Then as scanning for magazines and ads started to wane and fine art scanning started to take over, it was a much different experience. Color Managed graphic interfaces were introduced and a single click could get your scan pretty much 98 percent there, and a lot of the mystery of driving a drum scanner was gone. But while drum scanning software still has some complicated and esoteric features, all the packages out there today are really quite fast and easy and usually support IT8, Wolf Faust and Hutchcolor targets, making fast accurate scans simple. It's really pretty much the same in concept in drum scanner or flatbeds and they both do the basic stuff automatically - black point, white point and gray - if you want it to.

    For color transparencies scanning it couldn't be easier than scanning a Hutchcolor target and saving the scanning setting used to scan the target and calling that up when you scan. For black and white I always scan flat to make sure no clipping at all happens. That makes for more work in Photoshop later but it's always worth it. Color negs are the one area where it really does take personal sensibility as there's no visual reference and having used at least half a dozen different scanning applications for color negs, it has always come down to one software package that has been just better at it than any other and that has been the long abandoned Trident 4.0 for Howtek. That's probably where the biggest learning curve is and what takes the most operator skill to get right.

    To me, you sound like someone who has never actually operated a drum scanner or become familiar with the software and work like hell to convince yourself that your Epson is just as good. I started off with flatbeds then to fluid mounting on flatbeds then to drum scanning, but it was having the digital correction and toning skills from the very beginning that made the transition to drum scanning fairly easy. At least it seems easy in retrospect twenty-two years later.

  2. #32

    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Glasgow
    Posts
    1,009

    Re: Drum Scan vs DSLR vs Epson Scan (From Nick Carver's Youtube Channel)

    Quote Originally Posted by Sasquatchian View Post
    Color negs are the one area where it really does take personal sensibility as there's no visual reference and having used at least half a dozen different scanning applications for color negs, it has always come down to one software package that has been just better at it than any other and that has been the long abandoned Trident 4.0 for Howtek.
    What I've found works most effectively is not allowing the scanner to do any inversion whatsoever, getting the image into Photoshop, sampling & dividing out the mask, then inverting, then setting black & white points etc. Most scanner software and plugins seem to have real problems understanding how to deal with the mask - and I've often found that the impact of the onboard scanner software carrying out the inversion can be sufficient to reduce the performance of many high end scanners quite noticeably.

  3. #33

    Re: Drum Scan vs DSLR vs Epson Scan (From Nick Carver's Youtube Channel)

    Quote Originally Posted by interneg View Post
    What I've found works most effectively is not allowing the scanner to do any inversion whatsoever, getting the image into Photoshop, sampling & dividing out the mask, then inverting, then setting black & white points etc. Most scanner software and plugins seem to have real problems understanding how to deal with the mask - and I've often found that the impact of the onboard scanner software carrying out the inversion can be sufficient to reduce the performance of many high end scanners quite noticeably.
    While that is certainly true of many software packages, and I haven't used them all, but whatever secret sauce John Panazzo put into Trident is simply the best inversion I've ever seen. And once you really learn what it can do and how to affect color changes by simply dragging the white and black point probes to a different place in the image, you realize it's on a different level. There's a real learning curve to it and it took several months of scanning trying all the different options but once you figure it out it's fast and easy. The problem is that it only works for Howtek scanners. Well, there was a version for Colorgetters as well at one time but I don't think that version was ever fully updated. And just for experimenting and the sake of argument, I've shot 5DSR images of color negs on a Just Normlicht light box and converted them both in Photoshop directly with mixed results and also done the full inversion in Capture One, which was surprisingly good, but again, only if you're accomplished in that program. Probably the worst of the expensive packages in my personal experience was using Linocolor. Very complicated and very lackluster color neg scanning. Probably the reason most Hell scanner operators just flat out refused to scan color negs.

  4. #34
    Peter De Smidt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Fond du Lac, WI, USA
    Posts
    8,954

    Re: Drum Scan vs DSLR vs Epson Scan (From Nick Carver's Youtube Channel)

    “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

  5. #35
    Tin Can's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    22,387

    Re: Drum Scan vs DSLR vs Epson Scan (From Nick Carver's Youtube Channel)

    And the beat goes on
    Tin Can

  6. #36

    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    4,566

    Re: Drum Scan vs DSLR vs Epson Scan (From Nick Carver's Youtube Channel)

    No available lens for the GFX will project 400 differentiated megapixels on a 43.8 mm x 32.9 tinny sensor like the GFX has.

    Let's say we use a lens with same quality than a top notch Rodenstock Digaron HR Macro, $6400 at B&H. This MF glass yields "up to" 100 lp/mm (probably less in practice), which limits effective resolving power to 43.8*32.9*200*200 = 57MPix effective, no amount of shifts will enhance image beyong native optical quality.

    Add $10,000 for the GFX... for an around $18,000 setup if counting the stand and illumination which is at the same level than the rest of the setup, and still we have to remove scratches and dust manually for an imperfect job, when the cheapo V800 will remove all dust automaticly through infrared detection (specially in color film) saving a lot of manpower and it will deliver 150MPix effective from a 4x5, beyond 200 from a 5x7 and beyond 300 from a 8x10.


    If we are to stitch... then resolving power has little limitations, but in that case if we stitch a bit more crops we do the same with any cheap dslr, say an ancient D810.


    My mobile is said to make 100Pix images from pixel shift, the USAF 1951 target downrates yield to 10MPix effective in my personal tests.


    With present day pixel shift we potentially can exploit most of performance the lens has, if we also are able (!) to ensure perfect focus at optimal aperture, perfect alignment and total shake absence, but the lens itself is a limiting factor anyway.


    (The Digaron Macro has a ring adjusting position of an internal floating group for optimal work at the magnificaton we work... we need a lens working specifically well at our scale, or something like an adjustable Macro Digaron, if not that 18k setup is a pitfall)

  7. #37

    Re: Drum Scan vs DSLR vs Epson Scan (From Nick Carver's Youtube Channel)

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter De Smidt View Post
    I saw that! Very cool stuff. However medium format will still have disadvantages vs 35mm full frame. The native macros tend to go to 1:2, and DoF is much less. You could solve this with an extension tube and IIRC the Fuji system will still allow full AF, which is great. But then you're at 120mm on a 44x33 sensor, which means it'll be hard to have a lens that can do 1:1 on all formats from 35 to 8x10 on a single copy stand. I'm certain that sheet film will benefit from the resolution and tonal gains, but 120 and 35, you're already at quite a large enlargement from a single pixel shifted A7RV...(IV?) or S1R scan. Then there is the cost of course.

    Who knows what the S2R or S1RII or whatever they choose to call it will be able to achieve? Of course if you happen to HAVE a GFX100, you should definitely at least try it!

  8. #38
    Peter De Smidt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Fond du Lac, WI, USA
    Posts
    8,954

    Re: Drum Scan vs DSLR vs Epson Scan (From Nick Carver's Youtube Channel)

    Quote Originally Posted by sperdynamite View Post
    ... I'm certain that sheet film will benefit from the resolution and tonal gains, but 120 and 35, you're already at quite a large enlargement from a single pixel shifted A7RV...(IV?) or S1R scan. ...
    Agreed!
    “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

  9. #39

    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    776

    Drum Scan vs DSLR vs Epson Scan (From Nick Carver's Youtube Channel)

    Quote Originally Posted by Pere Casals View Post
    No available lens for the GFX will project 400 differentiated megapixels on a 43.8 mm x 32.9 tinny sensor like the GFX has.

    Let's say we use a lens with same quality than a top notch Rodenstock Digaron HR Macro, $6400 at B&H. This MF glass yields "up to" 100 lp/mm (probably less in practice), which limits effective resolving power to 43.8*32.9*200*200 = 57MPix effective, no amount of shifts will enhance image beyong native optical quality.

    Add $10,000 for the GFX... for an around $18,000 setup if counting the stand and illumination which is at the same level than the rest of the setup, and still we have to remove scratches and dust manually for an imperfect job, when the cheapo V800 will remove all dust automaticly through infrared detection (specially in color film) saving a lot of manpower and it will deliver 150MPix effective from a 4x5, beyond 200 from a 5x7 and beyond 300 from a 8x10.


    If we are to stitch... then resolving power has little limitations, but in that case if we stitch a bit more crops we do the same with any cheap dslr, say an ancient D810.


    My mobile is said to make 100Pix images from pixel shift, the USAF 1951 target downrates yield to 10MPix effective in my personal tests.


    With present day pixel shift we potentially can exploit most of performance the lens has, if we also are able (!) to ensure perfect focus at optimal aperture, perfect alignment and total shake absence, but the lens itself is a limiting factor anyway.


    (The Digaron Macro has a ring adjusting position of an internal floating group for optimal work at the magnificaton we work... we need a lens working specifically well at our scale, or something like an adjustable Macro Digaron, if not that 18k setup is a pitfall)
    I don’t think it changes your conclusion but the pixel shifting of 4 means the lens would “only” have to be capable of resolving 100 Mpixels, not 400.

  10. #40

    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    4,566

    Re: Drum Scan vs DSLR vs Epson Scan (From Nick Carver's Youtube Channel)

    Quote Originally Posted by Kiwi7475 View Post
    I don’t think it changes your conclusion but the pixel shifting of 4 means the lens would “only” have to be capable of resolving 100 Mpixels, not 400.
    Of course...

    But more than 4 shifts can be made...

    The way the camera makes the shifts may be undisclosed, for example shifts can be sub pixel matching sensitive area size inside the pixel.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 310
    Last Post: 28-Sep-2020, 15:23
  2. How do you scan 4x5 with a DSLR?
    By Rain Dance in forum Digital Hardware
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 30-Oct-2018, 18:55
  3. Epson v750 vs drum scan
    By spkennedy3000 in forum Digital Processing
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 8-Jan-2012, 10:38
  4. Use a scanner or a DSLR to scan slides and negs
    By Rider in forum Digital Processing
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 3-May-2011, 11:01
  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
  •