Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 25

Thread: Scanning 8x10 Negatives

  1. #11

    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    1,275

    Re: Scanning 8x10 Negatives

    Quote Originally Posted by Smitty View Post
    That is all good information. I have an older version of Silverfast but also use VueScan for most of my work. Just contemplating returning to the dark room or continue on the Epson print solutions. I am primarily a black and white printer have been using pezio
    Why not do both? I enjoy both the analog wet darkroom and working via the desktop for different reasons.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    California
    Posts
    3,788

    Re: Scanning 8x10 Negatives

    I do both. Does anyone know if Microtek has a driver for Scanmaker i900 which works on Windows 11?

  3. #13
    Alan Klein's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    New Jersey was NYC
    Posts
    1,629

    Re: Scanning 8x10 Negatives

    Quote Originally Posted by Pere Casals View Post
    As j.e. said, the Epson has two different lenses, the high resolution lens covers 5.9" so the 8x10 negatives are scanned with the lower resolution lens on the bed with emulsion side down, this still yields +300MPix effective which is an insane amount. Many drum scanning services only offer 2000dpi scans for 8x10", the same the Epson obtains for 8x10", a 4000dpi drum scan costs hunders of $ if offered, so we can say that the Epson and 8x10" size is a powerful combination.

    See my "famously infame" bell, epson 8x10 scanned, showing in your monitor like in a 6m high print: https://www.flickr.com/photos/125592...5/32535835184/

    See the bolts over the wood... well, this would be in a 6m print... if your print is 1.5m then it would be perfect.


    The V850 includes a Silverfast version that makes multi-exposure (https://www.silverfast.com/highlight...posure/en.html) that is useful for very underexposed velvia slides. If you purchase the V800 you later can upgrade the SF version to have M-E for some bucks.

    The 50 it usually includes a second set of holders, so you load next batch while scanning

    Also the 50 has lenses with better coating, but it's not clear if this adds any benefit in practice.


    The V800-850 does not include 5x7 holders so you have to scan it on bed with the lower resolution lens like with 8x10", but as the high resolution lens covers 5.9" wide you can scan it in holder at higher resolution with other third party or DIY solutions.
    Have you personally scanned Velvia with Silverfast?

  4. #14
    Alan Klein's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    New Jersey was NYC
    Posts
    1,629

    Re: Scanning 8x10 Negatives

    Does the V850 provide a better result scanning 8x10s with the required low-resolution lens or a 4x5 with the high-resolution lens?

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    46

    Re: Scanning 8x10 Negatives

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Noel View Post
    I do both. Does anyone know if Microtek has a driver for Scanmaker i900 which works on Windows 11?
    Was not aware there was even a driver for Win 8 or 10!

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Nov 2021
    Posts
    45

    Re: Scanning 8x10 Negatives

    Quote Originally Posted by Alan Klein View Post
    Does the V850 provide a better result scanning 8x10s with the required low-resolution lens or a 4x5 with the high-resolution lens?
    Not really, I have a V700 and a modern V800 (same as V850) and made test with both. IQ and sharpness is the same, because the basic optical and CCD technic is the same. Epson driver and scan software is a bit different, but not really better and faster.
    I tested resolution from groundglass and imageholder with 2400 dpi and 4800 dpi with the US-Airforce-Target: the differences are marginal:
    Groundglass resolution from 2400dpi scan was 2000 dpi net, from 4800dpi scan was 2200 dpi. Imageholder resolution from 2400dpi was ca. 2200dpi net, from 4800 dpi scan was 2400dpi net. My scans are not sharpend or contrasted.
    Many other tests outside confirm my results (within small differences). The construction limit definitly is about 2400dpi.
    But 2400 dpi is nearly 50 line-pairs per mm translated to filmphotography. I doubt that many real world LF-filmshots have this resolution!
    So answering your question: I mostly do my 8x10 colorfilm scans on groundglass and only sparely on WMFilmholder with later stichting. The only real advantage using the filmholder way is I have the ICC dust removal tools, which only works with color slides and negs, not with BW film.
    regards
    Rainer

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Romania, EU
    Posts
    81

    Re: Scanning 8x10 Negatives

    I also have the G4050 on the cheap and recently bought a Canon 9950f (on the cheap) and I am not impressed. I know for sure the G4050 is bad and was hoping that 9950f is better but is not. Did you ever have the chance to compare the G4050 with an Epson scanner (for 5x7/8x10 format) ?

    I gave up doing 35mm due to bad scanner but now I am happy again with Canon 5Dmk2 and a cheap diaduplicator.


    Quote Originally Posted by mdarnton View Post
    I scan with an HP G4050. As with most flatbeds it isn't supposed to meet it's resolution specs, but I wouldn't know because I never scan over 1000ppi, which is more than enough for large format. You can buy them used on Ebay for $50 plus shipping. Then power it with Vuescan--another $50 or so. Don't even *think* of using the HP software! I've been very happy with it. Scans on my LF flickr site, if you want to see what it does. Any lack of sharpness on those is because I'm using X-ray film, which isn't too sharp, itself.

  8. #18
    Alan Klein's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    New Jersey was NYC
    Posts
    1,629

    Re: Scanning 8x10 Negatives

    Quote Originally Posted by rawitz View Post
    Not really, I have a V700 and a modern V800 (same as V850) and made test with both. IQ and sharpness is the same, because the basic optical and CCD technic is the same. Epson driver and scan software is a bit different, but not really better and faster.
    I tested resolution from groundglass and imageholder with 2400 dpi and 4800 dpi with the US-Airforce-Target: the differences are marginal:
    Groundglass resolution from 2400dpi scan was 2000 dpi net, from 4800dpi scan was 2200 dpi. Imageholder resolution from 2400dpi was ca. 2200dpi net, from 4800 dpi scan was 2400dpi net. My scans are not sharpend or contrasted.
    Many other tests outside confirm my results (within small differences). The construction limit definitly is about 2400dpi.
    But 2400 dpi is nearly 50 line-pairs per mm translated to filmphotography. I doubt that many real world LF-filmshots have this resolution!
    So answering your question: I mostly do my 8x10 colorfilm scans on groundglass and only sparely on WMFilmholder with later stichting. The only real advantage using the filmholder way is I have the ICC dust removal tools, which only works with color slides and negs, not with BW film.
    regards
    Rainer
    Sorry. I didn't understand your answer past "Not really" Can you explain without all the figures. Which is better? 4x5 with the better lens or 8x10 with the inferior lens? By how much?

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Nov 2021
    Posts
    45

    Re: Scanning 8x10 Negatives

    Sorry for my confusion, but I`m always talking about the same absolute film-resolution not comparing different film size. My comparison of 8x10 film from groundglass-scanning to (wetmounting-)filmholder-scanning so is the same for 4x5 film. Or to compare the filmsizes: 8x10 scanning from groundglass is nearly the 4x absolute resolution as 4x5 scanning from filmholder (2200dpi to 2400 dpi).
    regards
    Rainer

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Location
    San Antonio, Texas
    Posts
    80

    Re: Scanning 8x10 Negatives

    Quick update to those following this. I purchased a piece of museum glass (2.50mm) and used a .060 shim (cardboard for the test) on both sides of the glass and got great full frame 8x10 negative scans. I used the Betterlight glass I use for 4x5 and measured from a granite base to the surface of the glass as I knew that it was perfectly in focus for my scanner. I then produced shims to move the museum glass to exactly the same plane above the lens. No issues at all and I can wet or dry mount with great clarity. This was much less expensive than any of the other methods (special printed or cut frames, etc) I tried and the entire assembly is less than $50.00.

Similar Threads

  1. Seeking scanning solution for 8x10 negatives
    By Smitty in forum Digital Hardware
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 28-Sep-2019, 02:08
  2. Wet Scanning negatives
    By Steven Ruttenberg in forum Darkroom: Film, Processing & Printing
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 12-Oct-2018, 12:26
  3. Scanning 8x10 negatives
    By Matthew Rolfe in forum Digital Hardware
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 5-Feb-2010, 22:23
  4. About scanning negatives (4x5)
    By macandal in forum Digital Processing
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 19-Dec-2009, 19:39
  5. Scanning negatives ???
    By shadow images in forum Digital Processing
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 12-Nov-2009, 12:10

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
  •