Intro to scanning for photographers

I'm an experienced digital photographer, but I just ordered a Tachihara 4x5 camera and a scanner to go with it. My intention is to scan my negatives, slides and polaroids to get them into my digital workflow.

Does anyone know of a good intro to scanning for such purposes? I already know what bit-depth is. I know the difference between linear and logarithmic data. What I don't know are the ins and outs of squeezing the best performance out of my scanner (which hasn't even arrived yet).

So... any recommendations?

Hi Erik,

Congratulations on the 4x5! That is a great step and you have just bought your own 30MP digital back, so to speak. More clutsy and slow, but as wonderful to make pictures. Why don't you let us know when the 4x5 arrives and then give us a running report in the Large format section. There are a lot of experienced 4x5 users ready to jump in I'm sure!

In fact, I'm thinking of using my own crown Graphic camera for hte same purpose!

When you report on the scanner, we can discuss more as the way film is handled and the software varies so much.

Asher

This site might be a little dated, but I remember finding it helpful at the time.

This one also.

And a quick Google of "scanning negatives" turns up lots of interesting looking stuff...

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

hope you have a better experience than I did with my 35mm scanner. It was a canon but the scans were always soft, with dust all over them, it was what pushed me over into digital. You should hopefully get some really nice files out of a 4x5, let us know how you go.

Daniel

Hi Eric,

The results and your workflow will very much depend on the scanner you will be using and the software suite. Which scanner did you order? Will you be considering SilverFast or VueScan software packages? Let me know pls, so that I can point you in the right direction.

Regards,

Cem

Cem Usakligil said:

The results and your workflow will very much depend on the scanner you will be using and the software suite. Which scanner did you order? Will you be considering SilverFast or VueScan software packages? Let me know pls, so that I can point you in the right direction.

Click to expand...

I'm trying to ease into this, since I'm not sure how well it will all work out (I've been merciless about cutting weight from my DSLR rig, so 4x5 is kind of going in the opposite direction). That means going cheap on the initial purchase (ebay lens and film holders, cheap scanner) so I can get my feet wet before spending too much more than I already have.

I ordered an HP Scanjet 4890, and at least at first will be trying to use the bundled software for the basic scan, then moving to Lightzone for most adjustments, with Photoshop Elements for printing.

It looks like Silverfast and VueScan are both reasonably priced (I'm looking at Silverfast Ai and VueScan Professional) so I wouldn't mind upgrading to those if it's a big difference. I've seen people raving about Silverfast, so the thought has crossed my mind already. If they give similar value for money to Bibble or Lightzone, I should probably skip using the bundled software altogether.

Asher Kelman said:

Hi Erik,

Congratulations on the 4x5! That is a great step and you have just bought your own 30MP digital back, so to speak. More clutsy and slow, but as wonderful to make pictures. Why don't you let us know when the 4x5 arrives and then give us a running report in the Large format section. There are a lot of experienced 4x5 users ready to jump in I'm sure!

Click to expand...

Thank you. I'm certainly excited. I'll gladly give a running report as things go on. It'll be interesting to track. For now, the running report is that of the 4 ebay auctions involved (and paid), none of them have sent me a single communication - I don't know if things have shipped or not. The scanner and film have shipped (B&H and Newegg). The camera is backordered (Midwest Photo Exchange - www.mpex.com) and won't be in for 7-10 days.

Nill Toulme said:

This site might be a little dated, but I remember finding it helpful at the time.

This one also.

Click to expand...

Thank you. I'll see if I can't get through those this weekend. Hopefully I'll have a good grasp of what's involved by the time the scanner arrives next week.

Hi Erik,

The trouble with SilverFast is that it is scanner specific. So if you order a license for a 4890, you are then stuck with it. If you upgrade the scanner later, then you shall have to buy a license again. VueScan, OTOH, support all scanners and almost all the RAW files from all DSLR cameras for the single license you buy. If you have Bibble, you won't need the RAW camera feature though.

In any case, both SilverFast and VueScan have their own quirky UI which takes getting used to in the beginning, the learning curve is steep so be warned. The best option is to download a trial version of both programs and play around with them to see which one suits your needs better.

I have settled on the VueScan after an elobarate selection process. I use it with my CanoScan FS4000US (Dedicated film scanner) and an old Epson 1650 Photo. It delivers excellent results. More importantly, it allows saving of the scan data in a RAW file format similar to a RAW from a digital camera. You can then re-visit your scan and choose other parameters such as curves, WB, sharpening, etc. in case you change your mind. So you scan only once, and process many times if needed, as easy as that. I love that feature since one does not have to look for negatives/dias, mount them again, dust them off, scan them, etc . Having said that, I should add that SilverFast is as good as VueScan and provides similar features (HDR), but it is more expensive in comparison. It's your call in the end. Try before you buy.

Don't hesitate to ask if you have any specific questions.

Cheers,

Cem

I've found that for 4x5, current flatbeds give excellent results unless you're going to print extremely large.

I tried Silverfast and my opinion is that while it might be nice if you're turning out the final result from the initial scan, if you're just capturing for further processing in CS or whatever it's largely redundant and just an impediment and extra expense. I prefer just making basic adjustments (to get full tonal range) in the stock sw and then do all the fancier stuff in PS.

- DL

I scan twice to get optimized for highlights and shadows. With a midtone one too one can them blend them in CS2 HDR.

Asher

Don Lashier said:

I've found that for 4x5, current flatbeds give excellent results unless you're going to print extremely large.

I tried Silverfast and my opinion is that while it might be nice if you're turning out the final result from the initial scan, if you're just capturing for further processing in CS or whatever it's largely redundant and just an impediment and extra expense. I prefer just making basic adjustments (to get full tonal range) in the stock sw and then do all the fancier stuff in PS.

- DL

Click to expand...

I tried a bit with the included software (HP Imagezone, I think it was called) and it was painful. Obviously designed for people who want lots of hand holding. I had to click through repeated warnings that I was scanning at too high a resolution - it wanted to scan 35mm negatives at 200dpi! I found the software so horrible that it immediately sold me on buying 3rd party software. Perhaps with more perseverance I could have reconfigured it to be useful.

I tried VueScan, which seems much more acceptable. I still want to give SilverFast a try as well, once I have something serious to scan. It turns out the only negatives in the house are some Kodacolor Gold 200's from my girlfriend's wedding. They look like they were shot with a disposable camera, so I'm not viewing them as a good test of what the scanner and software can do.

Hi Erik I'd be inclined to go for Vuescan. I only scan occasionally nowadays on my Nik 8000. The Nikon software drove me nuts (I'm Mac based) & Ed Hamrick of Vuescan seems to update & improve the software endlessly & he replies to questions. Also, once you've bought it you get the updates for free if you splash out the little bit extra for the pro version. Other than that I send out for drum scans on any sheet film or if I need a fat file off roll film/35mm.
Could be my next purchase & I'll go back to film full time.

David,

Glad you revived this older thread. Today one can scan a beautiful negative, adjust to one's heart's delight in PS and then send it on to be printed in wet chemistry! If one starts with a 4"x5" then negative then one only needs modest scanning enlargements. So to go to 24"x30" at 300 DP, one only needs to scan at 1800 DPI.

It would be interesting to learn what scanners folks are now using.

Asher

I've been using an Epson V500, a real bargain, for 6x6 scans at 2400 dpi. I know that the V750 has some real advantages, but living at the end of the supply chain, I simply picked up the V500 at BestBuy when in the US on a business trip and brought it home as carry-on. I've compared the results with scanning the same negatives on a Nikon 9000, but at a first try, could see little difference. (Epson about $160, Nik9000 if you can find one about $2000.) The Epson software is quite adequate for B/W negatives, Vuescan is probably more flexible for color, especially negative, which I haven't mastered. Compared with the flexibility you get with digital capture, scanning color is pretty frustrating, but for B/W work it is a lot of fun, and hard to duplicate digitally.

scott

Hi, Asher,

Asher Kelman said:

Today one can scan a beautiful negative, adjust to one's heart's delight in PS and then send it on to be printed in wet chemistry! [color highlighting added]

Click to expand...

What does that mean? Are there labs that take a digital image, "electronically" write it to photosensitive paper (perhaps with a CRT, or a line of LEDs, much the way that negatives for newspaper plates are often made), and develops that with wet chemistry?

Do we find that gives a better result that any available kind of direct printing?

Best regards,

Doug

Doug Kerr said:

Hi, Asher,


What does that mean? Are there labs that take a digital image, "electronically" write it to photosensitive paper (perhaps with a CRT, or a line of LEDs, much the way that negatives for newspaper plates are often made), and develops that with wet chemistry?

Do we find that gives a better result that any available kind of direct printing?

Click to expand...

Hi Doug,

Yes, depending on the equipment used, the results which are printed on traditional style photochemical paper can be stunning. The popular large format ones are Durst Lambda, and OCE Lightjet, althought there are several others such as Noritsu and Fuji that deliver equipment that uses digital data and print on photochemical paper.

The quality stems from the possibility to 'enhance' the data that is going to be printed. The Lambda's and Lightjets do wonderful enlargements with their high quality resampling techniques.

Cheers,
Bart

Hi, Bart,

Bart_van_der_Wolf said:

Hi Doug,

Yes, depending on the equipment used, the results which are printed on traditional style photochemical paper can be stunning. The popular large format ones are Durst Lambda, and OCE Lightjet, althought there are several others such as Noritsu and Fuji that deliver equipment that uses digital data and print on photochemical paper.

The quality stems from the possibility to 'enhance' the data that is going to be printed. The Lambda's and Lightjets do wonderful enlargements with their high quality resampling techniques.

Click to expand...

Thanks for that scoop.

I should have remembered that this is what the Noritsu's in the drugstores do!

Best regards,

Doug