[LargeFormat] Scanning 4x5 Negatives

[Joe Tait]

What are you then doing with the scans; are you printing them, back to film
and then printed on an enlarger?

The specs on that Canon are the same as the Epson that I was looking into,
except the Epson is cheaper. I think the price diff. is because of the
scratch/dust removal, which I would prefer to do manually in PS (actually
I'd like to see how good it can do it, without compromising quality).

BTW, I'm on Mac, is the Canon compatible?

-Joe 

On 11/24/01 10:10 PM, "robo" <mm5aes@btinternet.com> wrote:

> Hi
> I'm using a canon d2400uf and while I have nothing here to compare it with
> it gives results I'm pleased with. Full 48 bit colour at 2400 resolution on a
> 6 x 4.5 slide gives a tiff file of 123 Meg and a 5 x 4 B&W negative at
> 16 bit grayscale is 200 meg at the same resolution.
> It also has scratch and spot removal options built into the software.
> Comes with carriers for  35mm, 120 and 5 x 4 and is in the same price
> bracket. Worth a look. What swayed me was an article in a recent
> Shutterbug mag.
> One negative is that it requires a reasonable spec for the PC.
> At the moment I am running it on an Athlon 1000 with 256 meg of
> ram running windows 200 pro and it won't do 5 x 4 48 bit colour
> transparencies directly imported to photoshop,
> tho' I sure a bit of tweaking would solve the problem,
> as would more memory I suspect. (I'm a newbie in the world of large format
> so haven't produced a colour transparency worth scanning yet ;-) )
> Hope this helps
> John
> 
> Joe Tait wrote:
> 
>> I am curious if anyone here scans their negatives to retouch & manipulate in
>> photoshop?
>> 
>> Dedicated film scanners are out of my range (Microtex Artixscan for example)
>> but I've seen the EPSON scanners w/ 2400x2400dpi optical resolution, 3.4
>> dmax, 42bit color/16bit b/w for $500....pretty reasonable. They're flatbed
>> scanners, not film, so I'm not sure how well they scan transparencies.
>> 
>> Is that enough resolution/dmax to get LightJet prints in the 24x30 and
>> larger range? I've seen these prints, and they aren't as good, but I think
>> they look pretty damn good, and you can get them printed on film for contact
>> printing w/ alternative processes.
>> 
>> What's everyone else's feeling on this route?
>> 
>> -Joe
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> LargeFormat mailing list
>> LargeFormat@f32.net
>> http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/largeformat
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> LargeFormat mailing list
> LargeFormat@f32.net
> http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/largeformat
>