Drum or flat scan?

[Professional]

Three good choices would be Howtek 4500 (drum scanner), Fuji Cezanne (professional flatbed) and Creo/Kodak Eversmart Supreme (professional flatbed).

Also, contact Karl Hudson (see other threads this forum). He may know of a Lino / Heidelberg scanner in Germany that would cost less, considering shipping.

For my personal use with B&W and color negative film I would prefer the Howtek 4500 for 35mm and medium format, and the Eversmart Supreme for 8X10. For color transparency film you need a drum scanner for optimum results, regardless of format.

Sandy King

I shoot B&W, color Negative and Transparencies[slides], and i shoot medium fromat and not only LF, i don't shoot 35mm, so i will be using MF to LF[up to 8x10] with all kind of films

[zhengjdc]

I have owned both, and currently still owning a v700 and another Howtek D4000 drum scanner.

For 4x5, the resolution is more than enough over v700, and with doug's wet mounting kit, the result is very crispy, a drum scanner doesn't bring any advantages over resolution for 4x5..

However, the drum scanner still deliver low light performance that nothing can surpass it, if your slides having tons of shadows, v700 sees nothing there, nada, but the drum scanner can see something even your eyes won't witness over a projector.

However, there's a work around for v700 to compensate its very weak CCD sensor is by using Vuescan.

Vuescan is a must have type of software that every owner should grab one. It allows actual exposure control over v700/750 wayyyyyy before the A/D conversion taking place, which means it allows v700 has more dynamic range and allows it to see dark much easier.... a must be kind of software.

For 4x5 with Vuescan, v700 is more than enough if you know how to twitch the exposure control under Vuescan and no need go for drum.

my 2 cent.

[Laron]

zhengjdc: thanks for this post, i feel now much much better as i have already ordered a v700 for 4x5 scanning! Thanks for the tip for going vuescan. I would really need those dark tones...

[Richard Mahoney]

Hello everyone,

I'm looking to convert 4x5 to digital so I can use the large inkjet printers at school (and use photoshop as well) but my question is: Can a flatbed scanner give me high enough quality to print at 40x50? Drum scans are expensive, so I was hoping to cut down on cost, but my work is VERY texture and detailed orientated, so I don't want to lose that when I enlarge. The reason I made the digital-to-film switch was for enlargement purposes, but not sure the best way to go about it. Any advice would be great! Thanks.

Its is often said that flatbed scans are relatively inexpensive compared to drum scans. What is often forgotten is the amount of additional time required to make many flatbed scans half-way tolerable. Every drum scan I have ever received has been prepared ready for printing. Every flatbed scan I have ever made for myself has required an inordinate amount of post-processing.

There is also a critical difference between the `look' of a good drum scan and a flatbed scan. We often hear people on this forum saying that this only becomes noticeable at larger print sizes. In truth, the difference is noticeable in plates on a printed page, and even on relatively poor quality computer monitors.

Simply put -- you get what you pay for. If you are happy with a marked drop off in quality between your transparency and your print then make flatbed scans. If, on the other hand, you want to maintain the highest level of quality at each stage from the your film to your print, and if you have sufficient funds, then hire someone to drum scan your material.


Kind regards,

Richard

[Professional]

I think i will go with the drum scanner sooner or later if i can budget, this way i will never look back, i am sure i will always keep looking for highest level of quality and pixel peeping and printing larger prints of my film shots then i will curse my Epson scanner more and more day by day, so better get one drum scanner and enjoy the quality and no complains.

[zhengjdc]

zhengjdc: thanks for this post, i feel now much much better as i have already ordered a v700 for 4x5 scanning! Thanks for the tip for going vuescan. I would really need those dark tones...

the premise is that you MUST get doug's wet mounting kit for v700, as these flatbed scanner has absolutely NO focusing ability what not. Without wet mounting kit &Vuescan, v700 simply sucks.

Another thing you might need keep in mind is that, the time spent on wetmounting over v700 is more than drum scanner, overally I feel scanning a good scan on v700 is more time consuming than a drum scanner, maybe I am a perfectionist, who compulsively adjust the wetmounting height over v700, just to make myself *feel* right about it.

1st of all, you need spent 1 whole day for precise measuring the wet mounting kit height, it took me 20 trials.

Then you need to keep the film flat to the glass and this isn't easy. Drum scanner comes with special mounting station that easily can remove air bubbles but not with a piece of bare glass.

Without vuescan, v700 has NO ability to see the darks of your film, not with silverfast, nor epson scanning software... I found that Vuescan is the most amazing piece of software that directly controls the scanner hardware and it even allows you to save it into a camera RAW format.

Another thing you might keep in mind that a used drum scanner can be sell for just a little over $1000, if you found a working horse, it's worthing its money.

If you have really good 135 films, v700's resolution power isn't strong enough to catch some details made on my canon L lens, only drum scanners can see details at 4096dpi, where v700 seems to be struggling at 3500dpi and it's 6400dpi seems to be just market hyping.

[zhengjdc]

There is also a critical difference between the `look' of a good drum scan and a flatbed scan. We often hear people on this forum saying that this only becomes noticeable at larger print sizes. In truth, the difference is noticeable in plates on a printed page, and even on relatively poor quality computer monitors.


Richard

The "looking" difference is merely the diffraction limit of most flatbed scanners, that's why you should keep scanning lower than 3500dpi on v700 since over that limit, the lens begin to flare abit and the lens can't conform the 3 different light too well thus causing slight chromatic abbreviation around contrasty objects.

Drum scanner doesn't suffer such a problem simply due to the fact that it's a microscope lens with mechanical focusing gizmo+ a simple hole structured aperture with high sensitivity PMT tubes.

We expose longer on v700 for compensating the high S/N ratio of the CCD sensor, and lower the resolution for CA, and using wet mounting kits for its lacking of focusing ability.

[Karl Hudson]

Well I carry both if you are interested in a fully refurbished Heidelberg. It's not of much use for me to post anything on here because it always disappears right after I post it with no private message from the moderator as to why...same thing happened when I was offering cheap service on my U.S. Tour which worked out great for everyone involved, but those of you on here who might have needed my services in conjunction with an amazingly cheap offer wouldn't have known about it, since it too, was instantly deleted (twice)....you can find me on the Yahoo Scan Hi-End and the Yahoo Primescan Tango groups...I'm ducking out of here. Good luck with all your Howteks, Colorgetters, and other desktop scanners.
Karl Hudson

[Findingmyway4ever]

Everyone will have a different viewpoint, but this post by Don Hutton was enough for me to "know" that it is not worth using the cheap flatbeds for anything more than proofing:

"I have done a B&W comparison with 4x5 and 8x10 - drum scan of the 4x5 at 4000DPI on a Howtek 4500 and the 8x10 scanned on an Epson 4990 at 2400DPI (I believe that the V750 is maybe just slightly better). Actual resolution was not that different - however, the drum scan delivers far more microcontrast and overall a much better file - and that's on a 4x5 to 8x10 comparison. I've made 16x20 prints from scans of 8x10 negs on the Epson and then made the same 16x20 prints from a drum scan and there are very visible differences in the final prints - mostly related to microcontrast. In color, I would expect these differences to be even greater, especially from chromes.

Most people I have spoken to about the relative merits of consumer flatbed vs drum scans of large format film presume that the differences will be all about resolution - that's only a small part of it - microcontrast, dynamic range and lack of any noise are probably bigger factors to consider. If you have any doubts, I'd highly recommend that you spring for a drum scan from a reputable operator (like Lenny Eiger) and make up your own mind. I'd suggest it won't take long."

[Asher Kelman]

I have owned both, and currently still owning a v700 and another Howtek D4000 drum scanner.

For 4x5, the resolution is more than enough over v700, and with doug's wet mounting kit, the result is very crispy, a drum scanner doesn't bring any advantages over resolution for 4x5..

However, the drum scanner still deliver low light performance that nothing can surpass it, if your slides having tons of shadows, v700 sees nothing there, nada, but the drum scanner can see something even your eyes won't witness over a projector.

However, there's a work around for v700 to compensate its very weak CCD sensor is by using Vuescan.

Vuescan is a must have type of software that every owner should grab one. It allows actual exposure control over v700/750 wayyyyyy before the A/D conversion taking place, which means it allows v700 has more dynamic range and allows it to see dark much easier.... a must be kind of software.

For 4x5 with Vuescan, v700 is more than enough if you know how to twitch the exposure control under Vuescan and no need go for drum.

my 2 cent.

Does one get any advantage with the Epson 750 f one is going to use vuescan software anyway. Also, do you see any advantage in the Epson 10,000 XL Photo for 4x5 and 8x10

Thanks so much,

Asher