Scanner comparison: 3 scans added

[Leigh Perry]

I've added three more scans to the scan-around page.

One is a Screen DT-S1045AI from Ernst Vegt of Coast Imaging Arts in Canada.

Two of these are alternative scans to the original Heidelberg Tango scan. One was provided by Ernst. The other is from the Charles Cramer / Bill Atkinson Tango.
Charles notes: "I've got a nice scan from the Tango, which I think is an improvement over the one currently on the webpage, because in the deep shadows of the rounded red container, I see posterization. When I started using the Tango, with profiles made from just IT8s, I saw tones like this in some Southwest images. I had to turn color management off for those images! But, we got better scanner profile targets, like the ones from Hutcheson, and this problem seems to have been fixed ... I employed no software lightening, just the special profile that Joe Holmes made for this Tango (and a few other scanners around)."

Ernst was also motivated to provide a scan to show that better shadow performance is possible than exhibited in the original Tango scan.

I haven't seen the film for about 5 years but apparently it's still in good condition :-)

Cheers
Leigh

[Steven Barall]

The scanner comparison is a really useful resource and much appreciated so thanks to all who make it happen. -Steven

[Keith S. Walklet]

Thanks again, Leigh.

The TANGO comparisons are a wonderful illustration of how operator/approach/profiles all contribute to the final result.

[PenGun]

Looks like the V750 is in focus. Excellent comparisons.

[D. Bryant]

Looks like the V750 is in focus. Excellent comparisons.

Yeah compare the V750 to the Howtek 4500 and you can see the difference a drum scan makes compared to a flatbed.

Don Bryant

[Peter De Smidt]

Or compare the Howtek 4500 scans to those from the Kodak/Creo IQsmart3.

[PenGun]

Yeah compare the V750 to the Howtek 4500 and you can see the difference a drum scan makes compared to a flatbed.

Don Bryant

Yup about what I expected.

[Paul Kierstead]

Yeah compare the V750 to the Howtek 4500 and you can see the difference a drum scan makes compared to a flatbed.

Don Bryant

While pixel peeping. The scanner comparisons are really wonderful (and I used them myself to make some decisions), but, unless output is 100% crops, it is very tricky to say you can "see the difference". It may, or may not, translate to the final output in practice, with a ton of "depends".

Even though I actively use a scanner, there are days I despair of even this forum going the way of digital forums with a relentless focus on pixels instead of images.

[sanking]

While pixel peeping. The scanner comparisons are really wonderful (and I used them myself to make some decisions), but, unless output is 100% crops, it is very tricky to say you can "see the difference". It may, or may not, translate to the final output in practice, with a ton of "depends".

Even though I actively use a scanner, there are days I despair of even this forum going the way of digital forums with a relentless focus on pixels instead of images.

I agree completely. And some of these scans definitely have some type of default sharpening that was applied, whether the operator intended it or not. Just compare, for example, the scans with the EverSmart Supreme, EverSmart Supreme II, and the IQSmart3. One can see immediately that the Supreme II and the IQSmart3 scans have some type of sharpening applied that was not applied to the scan with the Supreme.

My opinion is that the scanner comparison is very useful but a person without much understanding of scanning could come to the wrong conclusion in many cases.


Sandy

[Leigh Perry]

I don't know why they didn't include the Nikon 9000 if they can include a Imacon Photo.

There's no great logic behind scanner selection. If someone volunteers, I take them up on the offer. The last time the film was in Sydney (around 2005), a friend had an Imacon Photo lying around. The scan was done in two strips.