Howtek vs Imacon vs Epson

[timparkin]

Good for you, but I reported my test results, not yours. You have nothing to disagree with me about unless you are saying I did not observe what I said I observed. I have never claimed my results were anything but my own observations.

However, you may have misunderstood what I said. I did not say that the best results were obtained when scanning at 1600 spi, but that 1600 spi was the highest effective resolution I was able to observe, even when scanning at 2400 spi, 3200 spi and 4800 spi.

Sandy King

totally agreed Sandy - in fact in my test the best results are had when scanning at 6400dpi (just to give a high frequency noise base that is easily removed) although I reckon over 1600 dpi (it compares niceley with a 2000 dpi drum scan - in resolution terms anyway)

Tim

[timparkin]

http://static.timparkin.co.uk/static...howtek-raw.jpg

This is best real world comparison I can come up with...

[Kirk Gittings]

A useful comparison, but as always only compares those particular scanners/operators. The problem is we never know how talented the operator is or in what shape the scanner is?

FWIW, I own an Epson 750, have access to the latest Imacon, and use a service for drum scans. Why the difference? Why use them all?

Anything quick and dirty I do at home on the Epson. I have had this Epson since they first came out and have experimented with it wet etc. ad nauseum. I find them useful but pretty low in quality-no matter how you use them. If I want to do a quality small print and am short of cash, I go for the Imacon because I can do them for free in the summers or pay a friend locally $15 anytime. IME I can get a better scan from the Imacon than I can ever get from my Epson. that si either me as an operator on the SAIC Imacons or a good local guy on his. If I am doing a print larger than 16x20 (or ever expect to need a print larger than that), I get a drum scan which run me about $150 including shipping. Currently I am using Lenny Eiger, on an Aztec Premium, for drum scans.

I have paid plenty of money over the years for commercial flatbed and drum scans that were not much better than the Epson. Its easier to find a good shrink than a good scanner operator (and about the same price per hour!).

No samples to show, but tons of personal comparisons along the way-I have tried every which way to skin this scanning cat and the above are my conclusions based on my requirements to do exhibition quality B&W from 4x5 over the last 6 years. i would love to think I could get more out of my Epson but I just haven't seen it-the difference even between it and an Imacon is tactile and the difference to a good drum scan is.....substantial. In the abyss between the Epson and a good drum scan I find the Imacon a notch above the Epson but still a few notches below a good drum scan.

[sanking]

IME I can get a better scan from the Imacon than I can ever get from my Epson. that si either me as an operator on the SAIC Imacons or a good local guy on his. If I am doing a print larger than 16x20 (or ever expect to need a print larger than that), I get a drum scan which run me about $150 including shipping. Currently I am using Lenny Eiger, on an Aztec Premium, for drum scans.

I had a friend's Imacon Flextight Precision IV here at the house for a few months last year and compared several medium format negatives with my Epson V700 and Eversmart Pro. I used the maximum optical resolution of each scanner, 3200 spi for the Precision IV, 3175 spi for the Eversmart, and 6400 spi with the Epson V700. I then compared results on the screen.

The Imacon scan was much better than the scan with the Epson V700, but not quite as good as the scan made with the Eversmart.

I also did the same comparison with a 4X5 negative, again using the maximum optical resolution of the three scanners, 2040 spi for the Imacon, 6400 spi for the Epson V700, and 3175 spi for the Eversmart. In this case the Epson scan was a tad better than the one made with the Precision IV, but the Eversmart Pro scan was vastly superior to both of the others.

If one were scanning 35mm negatives there is no doubt in my mind that the Precision IV at about 5400 spi would give a much superior scan to the V700 and Eversmart Pro, but its maximum resolution of 2040 spi puts it in the marginal category IMO for 4X5 film.

I was pretty disappointed for my friend with the results since he already had an Epson V700 and a Nikon LS-9000 and IMO the Imacon Flextight IV was not as good as the V700 for 4X5 film, and not as good as the LS-9000 for medium format film.

Sandy King

[Kirk Gittings]

Sandy, How were you scanning the 4x5 on the Epson?

[sanking]

Sandy, How were you scanning the 4x5 on the Epson?

I used a BetterScanning holder and adjusted the mount for best plane of focus, which is about 2.5mm above the glass bed. I mounted the negative to the underside of the AN glass, base side to the AN side of the glass, emulsion side down facing the CCD. I selected film holder to make sure the better lens was engaged.

I did not bother to fluid mount the negative with the V700. Fluid mounting will improve a scan with the V700, but does not improve resolution much, if at all.

Since I have the Eversmart Pro I normally use the V700 rather like you, for rough work and proofing. However, my opinion is that in a pinch the V700 is capable of a real good print up to about 4X in size from a good B&W negative.

Sandy King

[Kirk Gittings]

That is exactly how I used mine, but on mine the resolution is just not there.

[sanking]

That is exactly how I used mine, but on mine the resolution is just not there.

Kirk,

I tested two different V700 scanners with a high resolution target and both gave effective resolution of around 2300 spi when scanning at 6400 spi. And this figure is the same as the test done at ScanDig.

http://filmscanner.info/en/EpsonPerf...V700Photo.html

You might have a bad apple, or perhaps since you are used to working with drum scans perhaps you just expect more sharpness than the V700 can give.

Sandy

[PenGun]

That is exactly how I used mine, but on mine the resolution is just not there.

Have you focused the Epson? A big difference between stock heights and the right height.

[Kirk Gittings]

You might have a bad apple, or perhaps since you are used to working with drum scans perhaps you just expect more sharpness than the V700 can give.

Possible on both counts.