Absolutely true, but no flatbed scanner produces the scan quality of a dedicated film scanner. All of these things are tradeoffs at one level or another.
I have had four pro-grade flatbed scanners (including two Epsons, up to the V750 model, and one with true glassless film carrier capabilities, can't remember the name now). NONE produce the scan quality of the Nikon Coolscan V or SuperCoolscan 9000. Film scanners are simply much better at this and produce better results. That's why I still have the Nikons and all those flatbeds are long gone. Whether the results are good enough for your purposes … That's a different matter and up to you to judge. If it is, life is good… and you can still get new ones. They're certainly good enough for a lot of purposes. :-) G > On Apr 7, 2017, at 12:06 PM, Paul Stenquist <[email protected]> wrote: > > With the Epson V850 Pro I can scan a dozen transparencies in about 20 > minutes, and I can load 24 at a time. It’s a pretty efficient way to go. > > Paul >> On Apr 7, 2017, at 2:48 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >>> On Apr 7, 2017, at 8:57 AM, mike wilson <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> On 07 April 2017 at 16:45 Doug Brewer <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> I've been cleaning out my storage room in the basement, AKA The Camera >>>> and Computer Museum, and have uncovered boxes and boxes of slides, some >>>> of which are passable photos, and have become interested in maybe >>>> scanning some of them. I've looked here and there at digital slide >>>> scanners. >>>> >>>> So my query, if you haven't figured it out by now, is if any of you have >>>> gone down this path, and whether you have found a decent scanner. I'd >>>> appreciate any guidance. >>> >>> My observation of this phenomenon over the past few years leads me to >>> believe, >>> from other folks' scribblings, that the best way to do it is to pay someone >>> else. >> >> I agree. >> >> I have been scanning film since the early 1990s and have had quite a few >> scanners, both negative and flatbed, over the years. Since about 2006, I've >> owned and used the Nikon Coolscan IV and Coolscan V extensively. Either of >> them with the automated 35mm feeder can scan a 6 frame strip very >> effectively in batch mode using VueScan. >> >> But… >> >> The process is *NEVER* fast. A thirty six exposure roll is an hour or two >> worth of work. A thirty six exposure roll of mounted slides is about four >> times that because you can only load them one at a time. Add time if you >> select individually which frames you want to scan, and if you want perfectly >> scanned, usable, balanced JPEGs to pop out of the scanner with no further >> editing required—lots of time. >> >> It is far more practical if you have several dozens or even hundreds of >> frames to scan is to wrap them up and send them off to someone like >> http://www.scancafe.com … They'll do as good a job as you will 90-98% of the >> time and whatever they charge is a FAR better use of your money and time >> than buying a scanner. >> >> Buy and use a scanner when you have specific things that you want to do with >> film photography that requires your personal control of the scanning >> process. Buy a scanning service when you want to convert an archive of older >> film images to digital in order that you can see them and share them. >> >> G >> -- -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
