What's new
DPR Forum

Welcome to the Friendly Aisles!
DPRF is a photography forum with people from all over the world freely sharing their knowledge and love of photography. Everybody is welcome, from beginners to the experienced professional. Whether it is Medium Format, fullframe, APS-C, MFT or smaller formats. Digital or film. DPRF is a forum for everybody and for every format.
Enjoy this modern, easy to use software. Look also at our Reviews & Gallery!

Recommendations

B

bob01721

Anyone have a recommendation for a film scanner? I'll be scanning 35mm negatives, B&W and color, to print enlargements up to... oh, say 8" X 10" on my inkjet.

I'd LIKE to keep it under $400. I've been looking at the DiMAGE Dual IV, but I'd like to hear from anyone with experience before jumping in.
 
I had similar requirements and my Dimage Scan Dual IV works just fine for me. Don't forget to buy antistatis cloth and brush - it is easier and faster to clean negative than picture...
happy.gif
 
Thanks for the advice. I've also recently heard that added software (VueScan or others) can turn this little beast into a real monster.

My decision is made. Another Minolta product!!!
 
I didn't use VueScan - the included Minolta software gives a lot of options (check that first) and generaly I fix the scanned photos in PhotoShop.
 
Follow Up:

Well... I didn't get the Dual IV. I got the Scan Elite 5400 instead. After talking with people who moved "up" to a scanner with Digital ICE (and swore never to go back), I decided to spend the extra money.

My new toy arrived yesterday. I'll start playing with it tomorrow.
 
Hello Bob,
I just wondered how you are getting on with your new scanner.
I have the Scan Elite 5400 as well and find it very good. I like it. But I find it slow at high resolutions. I think that probably all scanners are slow unless you pay the price of "a good BMW" for one as one professional photographic shop said to me but I just wondered about your impressions.
John
 
John,

I'm simply AMAZED at what this bad boy can do! Understand that this is my first experience with a film scanner and I may be awed by things that more experienced users would take for granted. But comparing film scans of a negative with flatbed scans of an 8x10 enlargement of the same image, I find that... there IS no comparison! There's so much more information in the film scan!

I'm still learning/playing with the settings. Still learning whether I get better results changing a negative into a positive with the scanner or with Photoshop. Same with histograms, etc. So far I've been doing bare-bones scanning and using PS for everything else.

I also remember having some XP-2 negs that were difficult to print with B/W chemistry. I wanna see how they scan and print. Any lessons you can pass on?

You're right -- high-res scans take a while, but the time isn't important to me. If I were doing this for a living, that would be a different story. Bottom line -- I'm not "just" satisfied... I'm THRILLED!
 
Thanks Bob. I'm delighted that you are so pleased with the scanner. I agree. I love mine too. I haven't tried XP2 negs yet. It was just the speed or lack of it rather) at maximum resolution but I have been given some hints for changing my computers pageing file settings which I haven't tried yet. I'm going to have a go soon and I will let you know how I get on.
Best wishes,
John
 
John,
Yes, please let me know how you make out. Since I have only 256MB, I'd imagine that the paging scheme could make a substantial difference with high-res scans.
 
Hi Bob,
I tried the paging file recommendations I had been given and they didn't make any difference. In fact it slowed things down. I had been told to make the main C drive non paging and to have scratch (for Photoshop) and swop files on the separate internal D drive with files written to a separate drive. I cannot see how to do the latter.
I have three external drives and two internal so I removed paging from the C drive and moved My Documents to the D drive as also instructed. I had paging on the other drives.
This had the effect of causing the scanner to be unable to save to a file format - TIFF or JPEG -and to be very slow indeed.
So, I re-enabled paging on the C drive and made all the other drives System Managed. This gives total paging file size for all drives of 3070 MB. Since the computer tells me that it is using approx 500 MB paging when scanning at the maximum settings, that must be more than enough. Scanning times are much the same as before.
I have 1GB of RAM and I understand that this is important. I have been told that Photoshop uses about 80% of available RAM when it is running.
I have to say that I don't really know what I am doing when doing all this.
A former photo lab manager told me that he had crashed a photo lab computer by performing very high resolutions scans. My processor runs at 100% when scanning at maximum resolution with ICE so I reckon it is just that there is so much information to process that takes the time and creating such large files.I have asked Minolta what typical times are but they haven't replied yet.
I think for general scanning I shall settle for lower settings and avoid ICE except when it is really necessary. This should make things a lot quicker.
John
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top