Need help for buying a film scanner

[Lord Szechenyi]

Hey

 

So I found lots of negatives (1K+) the other day and I was thinking of scanning them myself (since it seemed cheaper than doing it professionally).

 

The thing is, I'm (mostly) a noob at anything photography, so I need help finding a good film scanner.

 

 

Ideally the resolution should be 4K or higher (or whatever DPI that is, I'm not sure how to effectively convert DPI to resolution), and possibly an integrated auto dust removal software (like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_ICE)

 

Is it possible to find something that meets the above requirement under 500€? (I might buy it used, meaning the brand new one can go up to 600/700€)

[jaslion]

I have a epson v500 which does this quite excellently. The v600 is the current one and just as good. Dusting is best done by hand as it is different for each negative.

[Lord Szechenyi]

2 hours ago, jaslion said:

I have a epson v500 which does this quite excellently. The v600 is the current one and just as good. Dusting is best done by hand as it is different for each negative.

So just to make sure, with the Epson I can scan at a resolution of at least 4k per 35mm film/negative?

[jaslion]

10 minutes ago, Lord Szechenyi said:

So just to make sure, with the Epson I can scan at a resolution of at least 4k per 35mm film/negative?

Yes and no. It depends on the quality of the film and scan. I also noticed the v750 is not a lot cheaper than years ago and can be had for the price of a v600. If possible get that it's the far better scanner (not that the v600 is a slouch).

 

But pretty much 6400dpi is what it can go up to. What resolution that gives is up to you (should quite easily do 4096*whatever the aspect ratio of the photo in question).

 

The reason these aren't described in resolution is pretty much because of the huge variation in film quality. To the point just moving film up or down a little can entirely change the result for example.

 

That is also why I like my v500 I can adjust it and if the scan of a picture turns out bad I can physically increase or decrease the sharpness. Technically the limit of 35mm film is 85MEGAPIXELS aka 80+ Megapixels more than you need for your result. How the pictures turn out is up to how they are scanned, how well they were taken and the quality of the film.

[Blue4130]

On 5/4/2022 at 2:30 AM, jaslion said:

Yes and no. It depends on the quality of the film and scan. I also noticed the v750 is not a lot cheaper than years ago and can be had for the price of a v600. If possible get that it's the far better scanner (not that the v600 is a slouch).

 

But pretty much 6400dpi is what it can go up to. What resolution that gives is up to you (should quite easily do 4096*whatever the aspect ratio of the photo in question).

 

The reason these aren't described in resolution is pretty much because of the huge variation in film quality. To the point just moving film up or down a little can entirely change the result for example.

 

That is also why I like my v500 I can adjust it and if the scan of a picture turns out bad I can physically increase or decrease the sharpness. Technically the limit of 35mm film is 85MEGAPIXELS aka 80+ Megapixels more than you need for your result. How the pictures turn out is up to how they are scanned, how well they were taken and the quality of the film.

The actual resolution of the v750 is closer to 2400 dpi. And there is NO way in hell that you are getting close to 85 megapixels on 35mm, especially with an epson scanner. I had one for the better part of 10 years and scanned over 50,000 images (mix of 35mm, 6x7, 4x5 and 8x10)

 

I recently sold it because I get better results using a DSLR to "scan" my film.

[jaslion]

6 minutes ago, Blue4130 said:

The actual resolution of the v750 is closer to 2400 dpi. And there is NO way in hell that you are getting close to 85 megapixels on 35mm, especially with an epson scanner. I had one for the better part of 10 years and scanned over 50,000 images (mix of 35mm, 6x7, 4x5 and 8x10)

 

I recently sold it because I get better results using a DSLR to "scan" my film.

Oh yeah no way you are getting 85 megapixels on 35mm film. Thats just the theoretical limit

[Lord Szechenyi]

7 hours ago, Blue4130 said:

The actual resolution of the v750 is closer to 2400 dpi. And there is NO way in hell that you are getting close to 85 megapixels on 35mm, especially with an epson scanner. I had one for the better part of 10 years and scanned over 50,000 images (mix of 35mm, 6x7, 4x5 and 8x10)

 

I recently sold it because I get better results using a DSLR to "scan" my film.

 

7 hours ago, jaslion said:

Oh yeah no way you are getting 85 megapixels on 35mm film. Thats just the theoretical limit

So would you say 20 megapixels (per negative) is achievable? 

[jaslion]

17 minutes ago, Lord Szechenyi said:

 

So would you say 20 megapixels (per negative) is achievable? 

Not with that epson you need like really high end proffesional grade stuff for getting even close to that.

[Lord Szechenyi]

12 minutes ago, jaslion said:

Not with that epson you need like really high end proffesional grade stuff for getting even close to that.

oh

 

how about 12 megapixel? that's basically 4k

[Blue4130]

32 minutes ago, Lord Szechenyi said:

oh

 

how about 12 megapixel? that's basically 4k

What is your endgoal? Are you making prints? What size? Don't get caught up in all of the "k's"

[Lord Szechenyi]

8 hours ago, Blue4130 said:

What is your endgoal? Are you making prints? What size? Don't get caught up in all of the "k's"

I'm scanning them, so I can look at the pictures on my computers

 

I'm using a 4K tv as my display, and compared to 1080p it's actually quite a big step up in resolution for me, so I want to make sure that when I look at my pictures I can put them in fullscreen

 

I'm never going to print any of them though

[Blue4130]

5 hours ago, Lord Szechenyi said:

I'm scanning them, so I can look at the pictures on my computers

 

I'm using a 4K tv as my display, and compared to 1080p it's actually quite a big step up in resolution for me, so I want to make sure that when I look at my pictures I can put them in fullscreen

 

I'm never going to print any of them though

Oh you don't need much then. I also run a 4k tv and my low res scans look fine. 

 

I suggest the v750 since it can do 4 strips at a time. Loading and unloading the holders is the most tedious part, doing 1k of images will drive you nuts. I did 120 rolls of film after a trip and I was ready to jump out of the window halfway through. 

[Lord Szechenyi]

3 hours ago, Blue4130 said:

I suggest the v750

Oh my that's quite a bit more than 500€

 

But if it's that good then I'll take it

[Lord Szechenyi]

On 5/6/2022 at 3:03 PM, Blue4130 said:

Spoiler

Oh you don't need much then. I also run a 4k tv and my low res scans look fine. 

 

I suggest the v750 since it can do 4 strips at a time. Loading and unloading the holders is the most tedious part, doing 1k of images will drive you nuts. I did 120 rolls of film after a trip and I was ready to jump out of the window halfway through. 

 

 

On 5/3/2022 at 8:30 PM, jaslion said:

Spoiler

Yes and no. It depends on the quality of the film and scan. I also noticed the v750 is not a lot cheaper than years ago and can be had for the price of a v600. If possible get that it's the far better scanner (not that the v600 is a slouch).

 

But pretty much 6400dpi is what it can go up to. What resolution that gives is up to you (should quite easily do 4096*whatever the aspect ratio of the photo in question).

 

The reason these aren't described in resolution is pretty much because of the huge variation in film quality. To the point just moving film up or down a little can entirely change the result for example.

 

That is also why I like my v500 I can adjust it and if the scan of a picture turns out bad I can physically increase or decrease the sharpness. Technically the limit of 35mm film is 85MEGAPIXELS aka 80+ Megapixels more than you need for your result. How the pictures turn out is up to how they are scanned, how well they were taken and the quality of the film.

 

What about the Epson V850 Pro?

[jaslion]

20 minutes ago, Lord Szechenyi said:

 

What about the Epson V850 Pro?

At that point you might as well get a dslr + correct lens setup for the price

[Lord Szechenyi]

1 minute ago, jaslion said:

At that point you might as well get a dslr + correct lens setup for the price

but I found an epson v850 for 550€

[Blue4130]

2 hours ago, Lord Szechenyi said:

but I found an epson v850 for 550€

It only scans 3 strips at a time where the 750 can do 4. It's not a big difference, but it saves a lot of time. 

[Lord Szechenyi]

5 minutes ago, Blue4130 said:

It only scans 3 strips at a time where the 750 can do 4. It's not a big difference, but it saves a lot of time. 

what about the quality/resolution?

 

also, can't I just buy another tray (that can hold 4) and put that in the scanner?

[Blue4130]

6 minutes ago, Lord Szechenyi said:

what about the quality/resolution?

 

also, can't I just buy another tray (that can hold 4) and put that in the scanner?

The actual scanning element is apparently the same in both. Quality should be the same. (some speculate that the lens is coated on the 850, but I can't see any difference) 

 

As for getting a holder, you could try, but I am not sure if they are interchangeable. 

[Lord Szechenyi]

2 hours ago, Blue4130 said:

The actual scanning element is apparently the same in both. Quality should be the same

From what I can find, you're right, but the scanned image is smaller

 

(Instead of having a huge image with a ton of bloat, it's smaller but the same overall quality)

[Brian McKee]

I know this is an old thread but I'm gonna chime in anyways for future people.

 

If you really don't care then flat bed scanning is what I'd consider "acceptable". However if you actually want to use your photography in a portfolio or do reasonable archival scans then it just doesn't cut it at all.

 

Depending on film stock, lens, technique, etc, you can get a lot of detail out of 35mm film. To me there are two real options for at home scanning:

 

1. A dedicated 35mm scanner. The benefit of this is ease of use and quality. Scanners can be kind of pricey, I use a Nikon coolscan 4000ED which I consider to be middle of the road in terms of pricing. Get a firewire version if you want something cheaper.

 

The downside to dedicated scanners is that any one worth your time is long out of support. So if you have issues you'll need to source parts yourself and hope whatever issue you have is actually fixable. With care though these devices aren't prone to dying. Each scan can also take quite a while, especially at maximum resolution (which is usually not necessary unless the film is particularly high resolution) and with corrections like dust and scratch removal.

 

Pitstop! by Brian Mckee, on Flickr

 

2. DSLR scanning. This can be more budget (if you have a decent macro lens) but it is more complex to setup. You basically need a good even light table (I recommend trying to find an older table meant for slides as they have replaceable bulbs and are far more even on average than modern LED light tables) and you need a decent tripod with a macro lens. FL doesn't matter but it should be 1:2 or better. For slide film you don't need anything else but for 35mm negative film you should use a piece of glass to keep to the pictures flat on the table.

 

The benefits of this method to me is that it's quicker once you have a setup going. I can scan far more photos quicker than in my dedicated scanner. Plus it allows for easier tweaking in something like lightroom. For smaller batches or where quality is absolutely paramount I still prefer the Nikon coolscan.

 

French Alps 1961 by Brian Mckee, on Flickr

 

 

For your particular case with 1000+ negatives I'd probably pick a film scanner capable of batch scanning. It'll handle all problems with it, cut up the pictures and such. The Nikon coolscan I use is capable of this but does it at lower resolutions. This is pretty hands off and can be done pretty passively throughout the day. Doing a huge amount of scanning with a flatbed would be absolutely horrible.

 

Here's the younger brother of my scanner with the SA-21 attachment. No holders, no fiddling. Just put in film and it scans.