If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
How provides hi end scans of E6?
I am working on a project in which I am shooting 35mm E6. I am going
to need to get 12 high quality scans to make museum quality 12x18 prints. I see two options: 1: I can learn how to use my Nikon 5000 Coolscan (I am thinking I will need to buy the $350 SilverFast software and a book or two) 2: I could outsource it to a high end lab. From what I have learned about scanning, it is a true art form. I get the impression that it would take me some time to master it, time I would prefer to spend behind the camera. Considering the limited number of scans I need, I get the impression that it will also be more cost effective to outsource it. So, can anyone recommend a high end pro lab that can give me amazing scans from my E6 film? Sam |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
How provides hi end scans of E6?
In scanning there's no substitute for a real fluid mounted drum scan. Allow
me to quote my colleague Richard Kenward who runs Precision Scanning Service in the UK: "All this talk about what is the best scanner makes me smile! Most pro Photographers I know bought the best lenses, the best camera, carefully selected the film, went to the lab they thought has the most reliable processing, stored their precious film carefully all at considerable cost then what. Yes they cheerfully turn their backs on the best proven technology for extracting all that wonderful information and resort to using less than the best method of scanning. We moved away from using Imacon scanners some years ago simply because they could not extract all the information, the smoothness left a lot to be desired, and then there was the digital noise.....not that they were that bad, just not really good enough. Really good drum scans offer better optical quality, are pin sharp right across the sheet, scans the whole frame if required, no pixel smudging or whatever you care to call it, and need very little spotting so an undamaged file is the result. No problem with any film so you guys with Kodachromes think drum scans. OK, so good drum scans do not come for peanuts (not here at any rate) but perhaps it is as well to take into account all the time saved, plus not having the investment of a scanner, etc." There you have it! John Castronovo www.technicalphoto.com "Sam Carleton" wrote in message oups.com... I am working on a project in which I am shooting 35mm E6. I am going to need to get 12 high quality scans to make museum quality 12x18 prints. I see two options: 1: I can learn how to use my Nikon 5000 Coolscan (I am thinking I will need to buy the $350 SilverFast software and a book or two) 2: I could outsource it to a high end lab. From what I have learned about scanning, it is a true art form. I get the impression that it would take me some time to master it, time I would prefer to spend behind the camera. Considering the limited number of scans I need, I get the impression that it will also be more cost effective to outsource it. So, can anyone recommend a high end pro lab that can give me amazing scans from my E6 film? Sam |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
How provides hi end scans of E6?
"babelfish" wrote in message news:ss71h.14930$DH5.14839@trnddc04... In scanning there's no substitute for a real fluid mounted drum scan. Allow me to quote my colleague Richard Kenward who runs Precision Scanning Service in the UK: You mean, "off of some guy who makes his living doing drum scans,"? "All this talk about what is the best scanner makes me smile! Most pro Photographers I know bought the best lenses, the best camera, carefully selected the film, went to the lab they thought has the most reliable processing, stored their precious film carefully all at considerable cost then what. Yes they cheerfully turn their backs on the best proven technology for extracting all that wonderful information and resort to using less than the best method of scanning. Most pros I know made several compromises along the way. I guess your friend just knows the elite. We moved away from using Imacon scanners some years ago simply because they could not extract all the information, the smoothness left a lot to be desired, and then there was the digital noise.....not that they were that bad, just not really good enough. Really good drum scans offer better optical quality, are pin sharp right across the sheet, scans the whole frame if required, no pixel smudging or whatever you care to call it, and need very little spotting so an undamaged file is the result. No problem with any film so you guys with Kodachromes think drum scans. OK, so good drum scans do not come for peanuts (not here at any rate) but perhaps it is as well to take into account all the time saved, plus not having the investment of a scanner, etc." There you have it! That's all true, but the diminishing return is left out. You pay a lot more for a little more. With some research, experience and a decent film scanner, you can do nearly as well, with every format except for large format--then you need a drum scanner, but only because it won't fit in the Nikons. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
How provides hi end scans of E6?
"Matt Clara" wrote in message . .. That's all true, but the diminishing return is left out. You pay a lot more for a little more. With some research, experience and a decent film scanner, you can do nearly as well, with every format except for large format--then you need a drum scanner, but only because it won't fit in the Nikons. You are correct that in many cases it doesn't matter, but there is a difference. The problem is that when you know how to do something better, how do you know that you should stop a lesser quality? There's a diminishing return in every endeavor as you approach the best one can do, but the original question was about how one could obtain the best scans possible from film for museum quality prints. If film flatness (which means sharpness) to the corners is important, then a fluid mount is imperative. While this is possible on a Nikon, it's a clumsy option that most people don't bother with. We use Nikons, Epsons and drum scanners, and there are valid benefits to the drum. There's no digital ice to distort the image for a drum because you don't need it. The fluid fills in the scratches and wipes away the dust. Plus there's a true point light source which yields maximum sharpness with minimal flare. And because it uses photomultipliers, the dynamic range is greater and smoother in spite of what Nikon marketing says. Drum scanning software is also better in most cases. These advantages are just as true for roll film as for sheets. It's not just resolution because not all pixels are created equal. A 100MB scan from 35mm on a drum will blow up better than the same size scan made on a Nikon or Imacon. One note of caution, however, is that pre-press shops for offset printing typically make mediocre drum scans for any purpose other than press. In spite of having expensive equipment, their approach and experience is different, and high production, over-sharpened CMYK scans is not what this is about. You need to find someone who scans raw RGB files into a color managed workflow to see what a good drum scan can do. john castronovo www.technicalphoto.com Disclaimer - Since my shop does drum scanning this may appear to be marketing for our services, but sharing my knowledge and experience of thirty plus years can't be done unless I respond to these questions. In fact we make all kinds of scans and drum scanning is the least profitable when done right and probably why there are so few people still doing it. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
How provides hi end scans of E6?
In article g8m1h.15178$DH5.907@trnddc04,
babelfish wrote: Plus there's a true point light source which yields maximum sharpness with minimal flare. And because it uses photomultipliers, the dynamic range is greater and smoother in spite of what Nikon marketing says. Drum scanning software is also better in most cases. These advantages are just as true for roll film as for sheets. It's not just resolution because not all pixels are created equal. A 100MB scan from 35mm on a drum will blow up better than the same size scan made on a Nikon or Imacon. It's a pity that there are only very few sites on the net that show the difference between a good scan on a modern Nikon scanner and a scan of the same frame on a drum scanner. It is much easier to spend money on a more expensive scan if you know what kind of improvement you can expect. -- That was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make. -- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Nikon Coolscan V - colour shift on slide scans? | Deep Thought | 35mm Photo Equipment | 2 | May 27th 06 03:46 PM |
options for high-quality scans from B&W negs? | Scott Norwood | Digital Photography | 4 | January 9th 06 04:30 AM |
35mm negative & slide scans - as good as *ist DS images? | GS | Digital SLR Cameras | 1 | March 7th 05 09:06 PM |
Higher resolution scans | Edward Kearns | Digital Photography | 3 | December 11th 04 09:02 PM |
6x4 Prints from 4MP olympus poor compared to 35mm scans. | pomodorojimmy | Digital Photography | 11 | September 3rd 04 09:54 PM |