Brand of Flatbed Scanner

On the basis of discussion on a previous thread,
I decided to buy a flatbed scanner to use,
along with my D3, in archiving family photos
from the late 19th and early to mid 20th century.
Included prints, negatives,and who-knows-what.

The only brand I saw mentioned was the Epson,
and the only models the V500 and V700, with the
V500 strongly favored.

Any other suggestions regarding brands and models?
Please add that I would also expect to use it for
routine copy-and-print of documents.

(I suggest that you reserve discussion of the
subtleties of the definitions of "dots" and
"pixels" for the other thread. )

Thanks,
Mike.

On Mon, 24 Aug 2009 17:25:52 GMT, Mike -- Email Ignored
wrote:

On the basis of discussion on a previous thread,
I decided to buy a flatbed scanner to use,
along with my D3, in archiving family photos
from the late 19th and early to mid 20th century.
Included prints, negatives,and who-knows-what.

The only brand I saw mentioned was the Epson,
and the only models the V500 and V700, with the
V500 strongly favored.

Any other suggestions regarding brands and models?
Please add that I would also expect to use it for
routine copy-and-print of documents.

(I suggest that you reserve discussion of the
subtleties of the definitions of "dots" and
"pixels" for the other thread. )

I've heard artist-types who like Microtek for color accuracy. Haven't
tried them myself.

I also hear HP has some that scan with two different light colors
("temperatures" maybe?) to improve color accuracy. Again, haven't
tried them.

"Mike -- Email Ignored" wrote in message
...
On the basis of discussion on a previous thread,
I decided to buy a flatbed scanner to use,
along with my D3, in archiving family photos
from the late 19th and early to mid 20th century.
Included prints, negatives,and who-knows-what.

The only brand I saw mentioned was the Epson,
and the only models the V500 and V700, with the
V500 strongly favored.

I have a V750 and it's very nice. Not a match for a dedicated film scanner,
but still very good.


Any other suggestions regarding brands and models?
Please add that I would also expect to use it for
routine copy-and-print of documents.

(I suggest that you reserve discussion of the
subtleties of the definitions of "dots" and
"pixels" for the other thread. )

Thanks,
Mike.

"Mike -- Email Ignored" wrote in message
...
On the basis of discussion on a previous thread,
I decided to buy a flatbed scanner to use,
along with my D3, in archiving family photos
from the late 19th and early to mid 20th century.
Included prints, negatives,and who-knows-what.

The only brand I saw mentioned was the Epson,
and the only models the V500 and V700, with the
V500 strongly favored.

Any other suggestions regarding brands and models?
Please add that I would also expect to use it for
routine copy-and-print of documents.

(I suggest that you reserve discussion of the
subtleties of the definitions of "dots" and
"pixels" for the other thread. )

Thanks,
Mike.

Hi Mike,

Also look at the mid range Canon scanners, they will do what you need.

I use a Canon 8400F fr exactly what you have mentioned and it does a very
good job and did not break the bank.

Cheers.

Pete

"Bowser" wrote:
"Mike -- wrote:

The only brand I saw mentioned was the Epson,
and the only models the V500 and V700, with the
V500 strongly favored.

The V700 (or V750) will scan more film frames at a time. This may be
significant for cranking through a lot negatives. The V500 is apparently a
lot cheaper. I doubt you'd need the V750, though: it only adds wet mounting
of film to the V700 and is otherwise the same scanner.

I have a V750 and it's very nice. Not a match for a dedicated film
scanner, but still very good.

If you get the film height exactly right, the V700/V750 gets very close to
the Nikon film scanners. But it's hard to get the height right. Even without
getting it perfect, they'll make a nice 5x7 from a sharp 35mm slide.

--
David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan

On Mon, 24 Aug 2009 17:25:52 GMT, Mike -- Email Ignored
wrote:

On the basis of discussion on a previous thread,
I decided to buy a flatbed scanner to use,
along with my D3, in archiving family photos
from the late 19th and early to mid 20th century.
Included prints, negatives,and who-knows-what.

The only brand I saw mentioned was the Epson,
and the only models the V500 and V700, with the
V500 strongly favored.

Any other suggestions regarding brands and models?
Please add that I would also expect to use it for
routine copy-and-print of documents.

(I suggest that you reserve discussion of the
subtleties of the definitions of "dots" and
"pixels" for the other thread. )

I've got a V700 and use it for everything from documents to scanning
and printing negatives. The only criticism I've had is its ability to
detect stray fragments of cat fur. However, the fur problem is slowly
leaving us, now that the cat has died (aged 21) .



Eric Stevens

David J. Littleboy wrote:
"Bowser" wrote:
"Mike -- wrote:
The only brand I saw mentioned was the Epson,
and the only models the V500 and V700, with the
V500 strongly favored.

The V700 (or V750) will scan more film frames at a time. This may be
significant for cranking through a lot negatives. The V500 is apparently a
lot cheaper. I doubt you'd need the V750, though: it only adds wet mounting
of film to the V700 and is otherwise the same scanner.

I have a V750 and it's very nice. Not a match for a dedicated film
scanner, but still very good.

If you get the film height exactly right, the V700/V750 gets very close to
the Nikon film scanners. But it's hard to get the height right. Even without
getting it perfect, they'll make a nice 5x7 from a sharp 35mm slide.

The photolab I used to work at upgraded their Frontier 340
to a Frontier 570. The frontier 340 had a dedicated film
scanner that produces a 7MP image from 35mm. This was
sufficient to print a very sharp 8x12 from a good slide or
neg. The 570 doesn't come with a film scanner, and the 3
options Fuji recommended were an Epson flatbed (9000 series
at the time I think) for low volume, a Nikon scanner for
medium volume, and their own scanner for high volume - with
prices stepping up accordingly. The powers that be decided
that although we were still doing moderate volumes of film,
it would die out so opted for the Epson. We went from being
able to produce sharp 8x12's to producing soft (but
acceptable) 6x4's. Considering that most of the film we did
was from disposable cams, it probably didn't make much
difference in the end product, but it was bad when I was
doing my own stuff or one of the few customers with good
gear would come in, and the result would only be as good as
a disposable cam.

Despite the fact that the Epson had a higher scan resolution
than the dedicated Fuji scanner, it was impossible to get
sharp scans simply because it couldn't focus accurately on
the film plane.

On Tue, 25 Aug 2009 05:52:18 +0900, David J. Littleboy wrote:

"Bowser" wrote:
"Mike -- wrote:

The only brand I saw mentioned was the Epson, and the only models the
V500 and V700, with the V500 strongly favored.

The V700 (or V750) will scan more film frames at a time. This may be
significant for cranking through a lot negatives. The V500 is apparently
a lot cheaper. I doubt you'd need the V750, though: it only adds wet
mounting of film to the V700 and is otherwise the same scanner.

I have a V750 and it's very nice. Not a match for a dedicated film
scanner, but still very good.

If you get the film height exactly right, the V700/V750 gets very close
to the Nikon film scanners. But it's hard to get the height right. Even
without getting it perfect, they'll make a nice 5x7 from a sharp 35mm
slide.

Since I already have a Nikon film scanner for 35mm, my concern is
with larger negatives and prints. I think I am hearing V500.
Right?

Mike.

On Tue, 25 Aug 2009 11:31:30 +1200, Eric Stevens wrote:

[...]

I've got a V700 and use it for everything from documents to scanning and
printing negatives. The only criticism I've had is its ability to detect
stray fragments of cat fur. However, the fur problem is slowly leaving
us, now that the cat has died (aged 21) .



Eric Stevens

Sorry to hear that.

Mike.

"Mike -- Email Ignored" wrote:

If you get the film height exactly right, the V700/V750 gets very close
to the Nikon film scanners. But it's hard to get the height right. Even
without getting it perfect, they'll make a nice 5x7 from a sharp 35mm
slide.

Since I already have a Nikon film scanner for 35mm, my concern is
with larger negatives and prints. I think I am hearing V500.
Right?

I don't know. The V500 only does one row of MF at a time, the V700 two. The
V700 _claims_ to have better resolution. The V700 is a _lot_more expensive.

--
David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan