Michael, I have found that the Epson 2450 does a better job on that front than the Minolta film scanner. I believe that the diffused light source in the lid makes the difference. I have taken some dirty slides and found that on the Epson they are not nearly as bad. Probably 2-3 times cleaner.
Bruce Monday, February 3, 2003, 10:34:30 AM, you wrote: MC> Thanks Bruce, MC> I thought maybe the film scanners would have some software to fix the MC> dust and scratches. Trying to fix all that stuff in PS is what is MC> taking me so much time. It's very tedious. MC> Michael MC> Bruce Dayton wrote: >>Michael, >> >>I have both the Epson 2450 and the Minolta Scan Dual II Film scanner. >>I have not found either to be significantly faster than the other. The >>only real advantage that I see right now is by using Vuescan for >>speed. It can handle batch scans on the Minolta. >> >>The path Boris is planning on going down will be somewhat time >>intensive, as you become the lab for yourself. The Epson is good >>enough. If it were me, and I didn't have any needs beyond 35mm, I >>would go with a film scanner, however. >> >> >>Bruce >> >> >> >>Monday, February 3, 2003, 10:03:13 AM, you wrote: >> >>MC> Boris, >> >>MC> Have you considered ordering from B&H in New York? My own experience >>MC> and those of friends leads me to believe that they are very honest, >>MC> efficient, and reliable. >> >>MC> I am saying this because I have recently been scanning 35mm negs with a >>MC> flatbed scanner and it is a VERY time consuming process. I have spent >>MC> probably 10-12 hours and only have 12 scanned negatives to show for it. >> >>MC> I would definitely encourage you to look at a film scanner. >> >>MC> Michael Cross >> >>MC> Boris Liberman wrote: >> >> >> >>>>Hi! >>>> >>>>Bill, from your response and from other responses I gather that Epson >>>>2450 is a satisfactory film scanner, even for 35 mm film. It is not >>>>top quality, but I suppose to expect a top film scanning quality from >>>>flatbed scanner is at least illogical. >>>> >>>>OTOH, at the moment I am struggling with local labs. Obviously they >>>>wouldn't babysit and fine tune their machine for my films. So, quite >>>>often scans come out with very lousy quality. >>>> >>>>Another problem would be that for sure in Israel to find a dedicated >>>>film scanner would cost me at least 1.5 times more than its actual >>>>price. So I suppose I am left with little choice. >>>> >>>>The only thing that would stop me is too steep a price or too old a >>>>unit. Since none of you reported any aging problems or any mechanical >>>>glitches with your scanners I must conclude that Epson 2450 is a >>>>reasonably reliable machine. >>>> >>>>As for the scans themselves. I've witnessed a person who is going to >>>>sell me the scanner getting roughly 12 MP file from 35 mm negative. Of >>>>course 12 MP exceeds by some 3 MP maximal optical power of the sucker. >>>>Still the 30x40 cm print was very good. Since at the moment my aim is >>>>at most! 30x40 cm prints, I'd say it would be acceptable. >>>> >>>>My rough estimate would be that if it does not break down within a >>>>year, it will return the investment... Then it could be replaced or >>>>augmented with another device. >>>> >>>>Am I terribly wrong someplace in my reasoning? >>>> >>>>--- >>>>Boris Liberman >>>>www.geocities.com/dunno57 >>>>www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=38625 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>
