Flatbed vs drum scan

[Mike Putnam]

I have an Epson 750 and it simply does not compare to the quality that I routinely get from a professionally done drum scan. I would select the drum scan in every scenario except when price is the only concern.
Mike Putnam Photography

[8x10 user]

Sorry Adam, I don't think you've seen the results of really good drum scans.

Consider the specs: HP Photosmart has 2400dpi optical resolution. DMax (maximum density) is unspecified.

Drum scanners typically start at 4000dpi - and up to 25,000 for a serious one. DMax is up to 4.2.

The photomultiplier tubes used in drum scanners simply have a much wider dynamic range than the very best CCDs. This does make a difference that will be visible in many instances.

That said, for the original questioner's purpose, the difference wouldn't be that great. But the 2400dpi resolution of the HP limits enlargements to about 8X with a resolution of 300dpi ? so a 35mm image would be roughly the size of a letter.

I'd be the first to agree a drum scan is overkill for many applications, but to say it can be matched by any CCD scanner is simply technically incorrect. Apart from the machines' capabilities, an experienced professional drum scanner operator will be able to get better results out of any scanner than the most conscientious part-timer.

And I'm surprised to hear these are hard to find in Singapore, given the volume of high quality printing done there.

As for the price of drum scanners - it's simply driven by volume.

There's no way I'd suggest everyone goes for a drum scanner, or that their quality is necessary for every application. But for critical print reproduction work or significant enlargements, they're still essential.

I don't know what it's like elsewhere, but here in Sydney drum scans are cheaper than ever. If you're doing a few with reasonable deadlines you can get scans done for A$20-30 (US$10-15) each. Very reasonable when you consider you're getting a professional operator and a machine worth A$100,000+.

Hope this is useful. (Incidentally, I'm not in the scanning business, but have been buying high quality printing for many years).

Some of you might have trouble believing this but I've tested my Eversmart Supreme to out preform an 8000 DPI drum scanner in terms of D-max and shadow performance.

Of course they are both amazing scanners, each has it's own advantages.

[ctg]

Drum scan, who still do them?Certainly can't find one around here.

[James Beck]

Drum scan, who still do them?Certainly can't find one around here

What do you mean by "around here"? I think you'll find plenty of members here who provide drum scans...or are you looking for somebody more local to you? I provide drum scans for photographers and artists...I'm based in Denver, Colorado.

Respectfully,
Jim

[Luminage]

AutumnColor Digital Imaging has 3 Drum Scanners. www.AutumnColor.com

[Lenny Eiger]

I do drum scans in the San Francisco Bay Area. However, most of my clients send me film - from all over the world... I run an Aztek Premier, 8,000 dpi optical. It's one of the best ever made.... and there is a photographer at the controls, which makes all the difference in the world...

Lenny

[Lenny Eiger]

Some of you might have trouble believing this but I've tested my Eversmart Supreme to out preform an 8000 DPI drum scanner in terms of D-max and shadow performance. s.

8x10 - that's an unsupportable claim. The ccd technology does not compare to the PMT in either category. A well-tuned PMT can sense a few photons banging around in the light box. The Supreme is a great flatbed, but it's still got a CCD sensor.

Lenny

[8x10 user]

Didn't we already go through this before? I guess I'm ready for "round two". How about you start this time by explaining why you say that all PMTs based scanners beat all CCD scanners in terms of D-max and shadow performance?

[Kirk Gittings]

Didn't we already go through this before?

Many, many, many times off and on for years........................................