[LargeFormat] Scanning 4x5 Negatives

[Tim Atherton]

the Epson 1640 is very very good fro the price (I have one), but will show
it's limitation now and then for difficult negs or really big prints. By all
accounts the Canon is excellent too - and possibly is slightly better. Both
are excellent in this price range (and do marvellous prints on the Epson
1290/2000 size printers. You just start to notice it if you want to go up to
30x36 or something. Even then, it still does a pretty good job combined with
Genuine Fractals (and I don't want to start a thread on GF - suffice to say,
I like it and it works for me...!). Your next step up for better scanners is
going to be 2-3 times the price.

Get Vuescan (www.hamrick.com) as well as just using the Epson/Canon
software. for $45.00 or so(+ a bit of a learning curve) it will let you draw
stuff out of the neg that the proprietary software doesn't even know is
there.

Tim A

PS - I would probably have gone for the Canon if it was out when I got the
Epson - mainly because I have had great luck with my 35mm Canon scanner -
they seem to give better quality for a lower price.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: largeformat-admin@f32.net [mailto:largeformat-admin@f32.net]On
> Behalf Of robo
> Sent: November 25, 2001 1:06 AM
> To: largeformat@f32.net
> Subject: Re: [LargeFormat] Scanning 4x5 Negatives
>
>
> No - at the moment I'm planning on completely 'dry' printing.
> So far I've only done selective printing to an old 300dpi HP
> 895cxi. The results have been encouraging - though I need to
> figure out how to match the colours on the screen to what comes
> out on the printer to save on wasted paper. When cash permits
> I intend purchasing something like an Epson 1290 that will give
> me A3+ borderless prints which will be good enough for 99%
> of my needs.
>
> For the rest I can send out and have a print made either from
> the file or from the original. For the reduced volume, the costs
> should be acceptable. (only half the nasty chemicals to work with
> and only my hands in the dark )
>
> The Scanner is Mac compatible. It's a USB device and comes with Mac
> software.
>
> For your info - there's a mailing list at :-
>
>  http://www.leben.com
>
> for scanners that I used to research this - it may be of some help.
> (just noticed while checking the above URL they have an Epson
> printer list as well!)
>
> On the spec you quoted the Epson scanner at 42 bit - the Canon
> is 48 bit colour- it's also 2400 x 4800 true scan resolution - though I
> have to admit I think it only scans film at 2400 x 2400 - can't find
> a definitive reference in the manual -  however must say haven't read
> the stuff on the CD yet! (yep - just your typical computer engineer -
> manual last!)
>
> Sorry Joe - I've no experience with lightjets - hope someone can
> does as it's an avenue I hadn't considered.
>
> John
>
>
>
> Joe Tait wrote:
>
> > 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:
> >
> >
> > >> I am curious if anyone here scans their negatives to retouch
> & manipulate in
> > >> photoshop?
> > >>
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> LargeFormat mailing list
> LargeFormat@f32.net
> http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/largeformat