File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
Hey /p/
I'm looking to get a new scanner and would like one that's a pretty cool guy, that scans film and doesn't afraid of anything. What's a good one?

Also I have some bias against HP, I've had bad experiences with their equipment.
>> Martin !!ve2Q1ETWmJH
     File :-(, x)
>>199923
>that's a pretty cool guy, that scans
>> Anonymous
Aw shut up Martin, Im asking seriously : P
>> Serenar !m827jEgWi.
Epson V500. My HP sucks too.
>> Anonymous
I have the Epson 4490 and honestly it kinda sucks. You can't just scan any old piece of film. You have to stick the film in these guides and the scanner auto-detects where the film is. The problem is that if the negative/positive is too dark or too light the scanner won't detect it and you won't get your whole image scanned. I don't know if any other scanners work this way but shit sucks.
>> Anonymous
>>199948

i am going to buy a cheap enlarger, penis enlarger of course
>> Anonymous
>>199948
>You have to stick the film in these guides and the scanner auto-detects where the film is.
The one in the image I posted uses a tray like that too, but I'm not sure if it works correctly. Also I think I remember this model in particular because iirc, ac has one. Dont know how good this is though...

Any other suggestions?
>> Anonymous
If it is a one-off deal for you then you could pay someone to scan it professionally.
>> Anonymous
>>199976
Nope, my family wants to use it to scan a fuckton of documents, but I personally would like to give it use for scanning my own film.
>> Anonymous
>>199985

Get one of those awesome high resolution Epson ones with the top and bottom scanners and the film mask.
>> Anonymous
>>199991
That sounds a little bit out of budget...
>> Anonymous
>>199994

Oh snap. What is the budget?
>> Anonymous
>>199996

THE BUDGET IS OVER 9000!
>> Anonymous
>>199996
Probably around uhm, 200 at the very most. None of that "Oh you could spend like 50 more and get this uberscanner etc etc" plz :[
>> Anonymous
>>200001

200 what? Dollars? Pounds?
>> Anonymous
>>200003
Dollars, yeah.

I'm looking around on my own as well, just so you dont think I'm using you guys or something. I really just could use suggestions, since everyone seems to give like 5 stars to everything on newegg for instance.
>> Anonymous
>>199923
I ordered that canoscan 8800F earlier this week. It does 35mm and 120 films and is quite cheap.

I would say that go for it unless you want to spend more money.
>> Anonymous
>I'm looking to get a new scanner and would like one that's a pretty cool guy, that scans film and doesn't afraid of anything.

Fukken lol'd
>> Anonymous
>>200008

So basically a film scanner for 200 or less and any other needs should be easily fulfilled by a machine that is capable of that? No odd requirements? At least that keeps it somewhat simple.
>> Anonymous
>>200016
Decent speed is good. Scanners in general are slow from what I understand, though I only have a really old one. Could use it being fast for documents, but I'd prefer a quality scan for my film. Guess that comes down to picking the right scanning resolution when using it, right? A balance is good I guess.... What's good for me isnt the same as what would be good for this whole document-scanning plan (several years worth of documents). Hmmmm... in short, pretty much what you said, really. I doubt it can get slower than the HP all-in-one piece of shit Ive been using for the past few years.

>>200009
Cool, how's that working out for you? (Quality vs speed-wise)
>> Anonymous
>>200009
I forgot to add.... have you had any trouble with the film tray? I read somewhere that some scanners have trouble with slightly curved film not scanning correctly because of a scanner's limited depth of field... have you found this to be a problem?
>> Anonymous
>>200021
>>200025
Im still waiting for it to arrive. There is little shortage on the supplier so I need to wait few weeks before I can get my hands on it.
>> Anonymous
>>200009

Any examples?
>> Anonymous
>>200072
>>200033
>> Anonymous
I'm also interested with this.

What's the difference between 8800F and 4400F?
>> Vincent !!8LCSE0Zp1mL
     File :-(, x)
I have this exact scanner, I posted some slides my parents took from the 80's before.

Its a steal for the price, quality is good, doesn't hold detail up to 4800 DPI (on 25 ASA ektachrome) So 2400 dpi is my max.

Haven't done negatives, just slides, but you have to adjust the color and contrast yourself to get proper looking pictures out of it. Takes about 1 minute per slide at 2400 DPI, no scratch reduction, and no auto settings on. (Do not use auto unsharp mask!)

First slide I scanned, (Left unsharp mask on, hence the grain) Half res from the 2400 dpi scan

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanoScan 8800FCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 WindowsImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution2400 dpiVertical Resolution2400 dpiImage Created2008:05:01 23:04:49Color Space InformationsRGBImage Width1549Image Height1065White BalanceAuto
>> Vincent !!8LCSE0Zp1mL
     File :-(, x)
And one more for good measure.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanoScan 8800FCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 WindowsImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution2400 dpiVertical Resolution2400 dpiImage Created2008:05:01 22:09:19Color Space InformationsRGBImage Width1051Image Height1578White BalanceAuto
>> Anonymous
>>200236
not op but looks perfectly good to me...
>> Anonymous
>>199948
>>199970

I have this scanner. All you have to do, is turn off the thumbnail, make the crop region 24x36mm, and copy paste for the dark frames. Problem solved.
>> Anonymous
>>200237

what national park is that?
>> Anonymous
The Nikon CoolScan line is considered excellent. We have a couple of those in my college's lab.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
Canon Canoscan LiDE 600F. Scans great, pic related.

Tri-X in D-76, 2400 dpi, 16-bit, overall image is reduced to about 35%, 100% crop on the right side. Some minor level adjustment and cloning to remove dust marks.
>> Anonymous
My Canoscan 8600F is alright, but if you only shoot 35mm I'd look into getting an older drumscanner.
>> Vincent !!8LCSE0Zp1mL
>>200355
Somewhere in Banff (B.C) Not sure where exactly.

They say its the most photographed place in the world, and judging by the Japanese Tourists I think they are right lol.
>> Anonymous
>>200387

I think Banff is in Alberta.
>> Anonymous
>>200236
Op here. Thanks for the reply Vincent, I remember these pictures, but I wasnt aware that you used that scanner. Looks perfectly good as>>200238said. How have you found the scanning speed (for scanning film or otherwise)?

>>200356
>The Nikon CoolScan line is considered excellent.
Indeed it looks that way, with a price to match however, they're over 500 bucks. :[

>>200372
>Canon Canoscan LiDE 600F. Scans great, pic related.
Looks nice, although this is black and white, so scanning it should be easier than in the case of color negative film. Would you happen to have a sample of a color picture? Also, how's the speed?
>> Vincent !!8LCSE0Zp1mL
>>200402
Lol yes it is, I wasn't thinking.
B.C = my home province
>> Vincent !!8LCSE0Zp1mL
>>200407
Can do 4 slides at a time, roughly looking at 10 minutes per slide for me after all editing and color balancing and whatnot is taken into account.
roughly 60% of it is working in photoshop though, so I don't think you could ever knock that to 10 minutes or below. (Unless the scanner was fast and very accurate at auto exposure, color and sharpening / cleaning up)
>> Anonymous
>>200411
Well, I was kinda expecting having to do that much in photoshop, but as far as the scan itself goes, how's that? (before processing)
>> Vincent !!8LCSE0Zp1mL
>>200414
Good if you manually adjust the color balance and contrast. Like I was saying before I don't see any more detail at 4800 dpi than I do at 2400, so go with the quicker 2400.
(Based on my experiences with 25-125 ASA slide film, kodachrome and ektachrome)

Also its version of scratch reduction isn't as good as ICE is (for epson) It just kind of healing brushes the trouble areas and it can really make pictures look strange, Its easier to blow off the slides / negatives with compressed air first, and clean up the corners where the dust doesn't blow off as easy.
IT also doubles the scan time.

I haven't done any 120 film or negatives yet myself to test those.
>> Anonymous
>>200001

200001 GET
>> Anonymous
>>200237
>>200236

Those are nice. Scanned with 8800F?
>> Anonymous
>>200416
Vincent isn't the one with a LiDE, just to clarify. I am :p

>>200407
Color pic attached, scanned from negative and corrected. Just cheapo ASA 200 print film - I haven't had a chance to scan slides with it yet. Not a very interesting pic, but I shoot color mostly on digital these days. You can also see a nice long scratch on the side - tried to clone it out but didn't want to waste the time :p

Speed is quite good, at 2400 dpi it's probably somewhere between 1.5 and 2 minutes for a 35mm frame.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>200588
goddamnit I didn't attach it. pic related
>> Anonymous
>>200589

What scanner?
>> Anonymous
>>200591

LiDE 600F
>> GOOGLE
i have the epson perfection 4180 photo for 2 years, hasnt failed me yet.
>> Anonymous
I know you are biased against HP, but they have a kick ass scanner called the HP Photo scanner G4050. I have a friend who has it and I use it to scan photos into my laptop. It is hella clear! IDK just my opinion
>> Anonymous
My CanoScan 8600F is really good, and I suspect the 8800F is one step newer/better.
>> Anonymous
is it possible to scan film with a normal scanner or do you need one made for it
>> Anonymous
>>200885
Scanners are similar to cameras in that most often, scanners that arent designed to scan film will just give you a preprocessed JPG. Those designed for scanning film negatives, for instance, can use different algorithms to remove the film's base gel's color which is otherwise too difficult to remove in photoshop if you're stuck in the former situation.
>> Anonymous
Op here. I'll look into those, thanks for the opinions guys. I think I might have to add in another criterion that's making me doubt if these are really good scanners for the job though, and it's worrying me: Can they or can they not drive nails?

>>200599
>>200608
>>200592
>>200588