Microtek i800 Woes..

[dietcookie]

So I just got in my new Microtek i800, super amped on getting it going so I can finally scan all my stuff. So of course with my luck, I have a nice and sharp 35mm Slide i'm trying to scan and it seriously is softer than shit. Is there something i'm doing wrong? It's so bad to the point, for me to sharpen in CS2 it looks like garbage, looks like a paint drawing after I sharpen it.

Now with that being said, I just scanned some Velvia 120, looks great! I've used an Epson Flatbed for 35mm slides and it was much much sharper than this, does this mean I have to buy a dedicated 35mm scanner??

[neil poulsen]

I don't know much about this scanner. I know that 35mm film bows a lot, so I wonder if it's a depth of field problem?

[Ted Harris]

Probably not a depth of field problem. More likely it is just the limitations of the scanner. You need to compare your results on that exact slide with those on another scanner before making any judgements. That said it could be the film bowin in its mount. OTOH, slides that look sharp as a tack when viewed on a light table or even projected may not be when viewed at extreme magnifications on a screen after they have been scanned.

Finally, as you already know, scaning 35mm on a consumer flatbed (any consumer flatbed) is pushing the machine out to and beyond its outer limits of capability. I have scanned some 35mm on both my Microtek 1800f and on my Creo Cezanne and the results don't even look like it was the same original image. Back to the real sharpness of the specific slide, some of the slides we are now scanning as part of a National Geographic/Hallmark Museum project are (IMO) way less sharp than the photographer thought they were. I can't emphasise enough that, even with a perfect 35mm slide, consumer scanners just won't do a very good job with them.

So, if you want to print via scanning from 35mm slides at anything larger than maybe 4x6, yes, you will need a dedicated film scanner in addition to your i800.

[Frank Petronio]

Even the $200 KonicaMinolta DImage slide scanners are head and shoulders better than any of the consumer flatbeds.

[JavaDuke]

Dietcookie,

Sorry, if I say something obvoius but here's my 2 cents:

1) Always scan at scanner's optical resolution. You can always resize image in Photoshop because it has much better resizing algorithms than scanners software.
2) What settings do you use for Unsharp Mask filter in CS2? Sometimes alternative sharpening techniques can make better results, such as high pass method.

Hope it helps!

[dietcookie]

Dietcookie,

Sorry, if I say something obvoius but here's my 2 cents:

1) Always scan at scanner's optical resolution. You can always resize image in Photoshop because it has much better resizing algorithms than scanners software.
2) What settings do you use for Unsharp Mask filter in CS2? Sometimes alternative sharpening techniques can make better results, such as high pass method.

Hope it helps!

1) I'll try my next scan at 4800DPI

2) This is something I never really knew what I was doing, but used it till it looked right. Typically .8 pixels somewhere between 120% to 200% Or something like 20 pixels and 20% to 40%, depends on what it is of course.

I'll keep trying to get my 120/LF scans looking half-decent, I tried scanning some BW 120 and I think I just need to play around with the exposure/histogram settings.

[JavaDuke]

2) This is something I never really knew what I was doing, but used it till it looked right. Typically .8 pixels somewhere between 120% to 200% Or something like 20 pixels and 20% to 40%, depends on what it is of course.

Try this method - http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tu...arpening.shtml - or this - http://www.bythom.com/sharpening.htm#edge

[Ted Harris]

You are just wasting file space scanning at 4800 spi. The real optical resolution of the i800 is around 2200 spi so scan at 2400.