Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
PhotoKB Home
Discussion Groups
Digital Photography
Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot Cameras
Film Photography
35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther Equipment
Photo Technique
Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique General
General Photo Topics
General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK Photography
DirectoryPhoto Clubs

Photo Forum / Film Photography / Large Format / July 2004

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Scanner for 4X5 - recommendations

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
nee sung - 22 Jul 2004 08:13 GMT
Will be gratefully received.

Thank you all in adcance.

Nee Sung
metchikabool - 22 Jul 2004 14:05 GMT
using epson 3200. Good scans for prints up to 24 x 30

>Will be gratefully received.
>
>Thank you all in adcance.
>
>Nee Sung
jjs - 22 Jul 2004 14:48 GMT
>> >Will be gratefully received.

> using epson 3200. Good scans for prints up to 24 x 30

At what settings, please?
Leonard Evens - 22 Jul 2004 14:32 GMT
> Will be gratefully received.

I've been using an Epson 3200 successfully with negative film, color and
b/w.   It has been replaced by the Epson 4870, which, according to
reports, may be a bit better.   The main problem with the 3200 is that
its dmax is a little low.  If your transparencies are properly exposred
or even slightly underexposed, that won't be a problem, but if they are
slightly overexposed, it could be.  The 4870 has a slightly higher dmax,
so whould work better with transparencies.   The only problem I've seen
reported with the 4870 is that if you try to scan at 48 bit color depth
at higher than 2400 ppi, then you can't scan the whole 4 inch width.
You have to do it in two sections and merge them in a photoeditor.  You
can scan the whole 4 inch width in 24 bit color depth up to 4800 ppi.
But you probably lose little or no actual resolution if you scan at 2400
ppi anyway.

At its price, the 4870 is a very good buy and should produce quite good
4 x 5 scans.   Of course you would do better with a $13,000 Imacon or
similar scanner, but within the same price range as the 4870, you aren't
going to do much better.  If you can find a 3200, that also should suffice.

See www.math.northwestern.edu/~len/photos/pages/e2450.html.   The last
example is a 4 x 5 scan done with an Epson 2450.  The 3200 and 4870
would resolve somewhat more fine detail.

> Thank you all in adcance.
>
> Nee Sung
jjs - 22 Jul 2004 14:51 GMT
>[...] The only problem I've seen
> reported with the 4870 is that if you try to scan at 48 bit color depth
> at higher than 2400 ppi, then you can't scan the whole 4 inch width.

Leonard, I've come across a problem with the 3200 that may relate. I'm not
sure. When I try to scan 4x5 at a particularly high (and probably useless)
sample-rate, the scan software complains that it cannot do it and suggests
that I move my selection farther to the top and left. As you know, the 4x5
holder for the 3200 is at the 'bottom' of the film holder which makes this
impossible. Same problem?
metchikabool - 22 Jul 2004 17:00 GMT
similar problem. The system freezes for me at that setting, so i just
go to the next lower.
I do not use Silverfast, preferring instead to use epson scan with no
color correction, then do all corection in PS. I've found that this
setting allows me to get both shadow and highlight detail.

jack

>>[...] The only problem I've seen
>> reported with the 4870 is that if you try to scan at 48 bit color depth
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>holder for the 3200 is at the 'bottom' of the film holder which makes this
>impossible. Same problem?
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.