Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
Thread started 04 Apr 2016 (Monday) 13:12
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

What brand 120mm scanner do I need

 
Archibald
You must be quackers!
Avatar
9,203 posts
Gallery: 416 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 19676
Joined May 2008
Location: Calgary
     
Apr 07, 2016 11:51 |  #31

TooManyShots wrote in post #17963720 (external link)
Most scanning software that comes with the scanners are pretty featureless and they are designed for quick scanning.

Not true. You are perhaps thinking of the default settings.


Sony RX10 IV, Canon 7D2, Canon 90D, assorted Canon lenses
C&C always welcome.
Picture editing OK
Donate to POTN here

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
TooManyShots
Cream of the Crop
10,203 posts
Likes: 525
Joined Jan 2008
Location: NYC
     
Apr 07, 2016 12:05 |  #32
bannedPermanent ban

Archibald wrote in post #17963728 (external link)
Not true. You are perhaps thinking of the default settings.

They don't give me much controls. And the software would not work if you aren't using scanner film holders, which something I don't even use. With VueScan, I can even invert my DSLR scans in TIFF files AND VueScan works with many scanners. I have a Plustek 8100 for scanning 35mm. I used to use a flatbed scanner for 120 negatives....until I found a better scanner option, DSLR scanning..which gives me as large scan as I need, depending on your macro magnification ratio and how many sections you can scan on one negative. I can produce a 8000 pixel resolution scan using my D7000 to copy my negatives. 8000 pixel native resolution!!!! :)


One Imaging Photography (external link) and my Flickr (external link)
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SkipD
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
20,476 posts
Likes: 158
Joined Dec 2002
Location: Southeastern WI, USA
     
Apr 07, 2016 12:26 |  #33

TooManyShots wrote in post #17963743 (external link)
I can produce a 8000 pixel resolution scan using my D7000 to copy my negatives. 8000 pixel native resolution!!!! :)

What do you mean by "8000 pixel resolution"? Is that 8000 pixels in one direction on an image or a total of 8000 pixels in the image? Your statement does not seem to be supported by the published D7000 specifications.

Thanks.


Skip Douglas
A few cameras and over 50 years behind them .....
..... but still learning all the time.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Archibald
You must be quackers!
Avatar
9,203 posts
Gallery: 416 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 19676
Joined May 2008
Location: Calgary
     
Apr 07, 2016 12:31 |  #34

TooManyShots wrote in post #17963743 (external link)
They don't give me much controls. And the software would not work if you aren't using scanner film holders, which something I don't even use. With VueScan, I can even invert my DSLR scans in TIFF files AND VueScan works with many scanners. I have a Plustek 8100 for scanning 35mm. I used to use a flatbed scanner for 120 negatives....until I found a better scanner option, DSLR scanning..which gives me as large scan as I need, depending on your macro magnification ratio and how many sections you can scan on one negative. I can produce a 8000 pixel resolution scan using my D7000 to copy my negatives. 8000 pixel native resolution!!!! :)

Very complicated response to a simple issue.

My Epson Scan software has all the features I need to make excellent hi res scans of my negs.

When you say 8000 px, do you mean 8000 px, or 8000 dpi? If 8000 dpi, then I think you are chasing windmills. Once you are past ~3000 dpi on normal color film, you are seriously into diminishing returns. You will be resolving the shape of every grain, and that is not adding anything to the image.


Sony RX10 IV, Canon 7D2, Canon 90D, assorted Canon lenses
C&C always welcome.
Picture editing OK
Donate to POTN here

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TooManyShots
Cream of the Crop
10,203 posts
Likes: 525
Joined Jan 2008
Location: NYC
     
Apr 07, 2016 12:46 |  #35
bannedPermanent ban

SkipD wrote in post #17963759 (external link)
What do you mean by "8000 pixel resolution"? Is that 8000 pixels in one direction on an image or a total of 8000 pixels in the image? Your statement does not seem to be supported by the published D7000 specifications.

Thanks.


Hahahahaha...guys...I am scanning with my D7000 with an effective 4900 pixel on the long end. If I scan the negative in 2 sections with a 6x6 format, I could effectively achieve a 9000 pixel resolution on the long end by combing the negatives..:) This will give me a tiff file. For black and white, I can export this tiff file to VueScan and to invert it. Then, exporting back to photoshop for further retouching.


For color negatives, I can invert in photoshop and to use colorneg to color correct the shot.

Film scanning or copying IS complicated. Is an art.


One Imaging Photography (external link) and my Flickr (external link)
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Archibald
You must be quackers!
Avatar
9,203 posts
Gallery: 416 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 19676
Joined May 2008
Location: Calgary
     
Apr 07, 2016 12:59 |  #36

TooManyShots wrote in post #17963777 (external link)
Hahahahaha...guys...I am scanning with my D7000 with an effective 4900 pixel on the long end....

That's not scanning.


Sony RX10 IV, Canon 7D2, Canon 90D, assorted Canon lenses
C&C always welcome.
Picture editing OK
Donate to POTN here

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TooManyShots
Cream of the Crop
10,203 posts
Likes: 525
Joined Jan 2008
Location: NYC
Post edited over 3 years ago by TooManyShots.
     
Apr 07, 2016 13:11 |  #37
bannedPermanent ban

Archibald wrote in post #17963788 (external link)
That's not scanning.

And your point is??? Scanning negatives is considered the purist approach to film photography???? :) :) All that matters is that I can digitize my negatives with quality...or you can get stuck using a sub $200 flatbed scanner trying to squeeze out every single drop of resolution..not much BTW.

Here are the results....

Kodak Ektar 100

IMAGE: https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5625/22807833664_17cf6b545f_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/AKs7​ks  (external link) rawvideostore (external link) by vracing (external link), on Flickr


Resized to 3000 pixel resolution
EMBED PREVENTED
CUSTOM DOWNLOAD SIZE LIMIT 2.5 MB EXCEEDED: 8.48 MB
https://farm6.staticfl​ickr.com …07833664_06f7f8​9a24_o.jpg
rawvideostore (external link) by vracing (external link), on Flickr


Expired Tmax 400 dipped in Rodinal.

IMAGE: https://farm1.staticflickr.com/652/22608773518_f8e2695df7_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/ArRS​FY  (external link) bythesubway (external link) by vracing (external link), on Flickr


3000 pixel resolution here.

EMBED PREVENTED
CUSTOM DOWNLOAD SIZE LIMIT 2.5 MB EXCEEDED: 4.17 MB
https://farm1.staticfl​ickr.com …08773518_13dbb5​af30_o.jpg
bythesubway (external link) by vracing (external link), on Flickr

One Imaging Photography (external link) and my Flickr (external link)
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
NASS ­ Photo
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,884 posts
Likes: 352
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Westmoreland Co., PA
     
Apr 10, 2016 12:00 |  #38

Gentlemen. Thanks you for the learning discussion on scanning software. I am starting to scan my 35mm slides. Hopefully this month, I will start scanning my 120mm transparencies. In the mean time, I will look into the other software that you mentioned. Thank you for the advise. Nick


NickS

Canon 5DMIII; Canon EF35mm, f/1.4L; EF85mm, f/1.8; EF135mm, f/2.0L; EF200mm, f/2.8L.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Archibald
You must be quackers!
Avatar
9,203 posts
Gallery: 416 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 19676
Joined May 2008
Location: Calgary
     
Apr 10, 2016 12:02 |  #39

NASS Photo wrote in post #17967047 (external link)
Gentlemen. Thanks you for the learning discussion on scanning software. I am starting to scan my 35mm slides. Hopefully this month, I will start scanning my 120mm transparencies. In the mean time, I will look into the other software that you mentioned. Thank you for the advise. Nick

We already said they are not 120mm.


Sony RX10 IV, Canon 7D2, Canon 90D, assorted Canon lenses
C&C always welcome.
Picture editing OK
Donate to POTN here

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
NASS ­ Photo
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,884 posts
Likes: 352
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Westmoreland Co., PA
     
Apr 10, 2016 12:07 |  #40

Archibald wrote in post #17967050 (external link)
We already said they are not 120mm.

Sorry. I realize that. Senior moments keep popping up. In the future, I will say medium format.


NickS

Canon 5DMIII; Canon EF35mm, f/1.4L; EF85mm, f/1.8; EF135mm, f/2.0L; EF200mm, f/2.8L.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SkipD
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
20,476 posts
Likes: 158
Joined Dec 2002
Location: Southeastern WI, USA
     
Apr 10, 2016 14:28 |  #41

NASS Photo wrote in post #17967057 (external link)
Sorry. I realize that. Senior moments keep popping up. In the future, I will say medium format.

There are many different image sizes and aspect ratios that are all called "medium format". If you want to reference a specific size format, then simply use the short versions for them. For example, my Mamiya C33 uses the "6x6" format (120 film with a roughly 6cm square film frame).


Skip Douglas
A few cameras and over 50 years behind them .....
..... but still learning all the time.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BigAl007
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,011 posts
Gallery: 543 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 1617
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Repps cum Bastwick, Gt Yarmouth, Norfolk, UK.
     
Apr 10, 2016 17:51 |  #42

The other option that used to be very common when describing "Medium Format" formats on 120 film, was to use the number of frames on a roll of film. All the formats shot on 120 film share a nominal 6cm dimension (although generally it's closer to 55mm) based on the width of the film. The format is then just defined by the number of frames you can get. With IIRC 6×4.5 being 16 on 120, 6x6 being 12 on 120 and 6×7 being 8 on 120, the last is the one I have least confidence in being the correct value.

Alan


My Flickr (external link)
My new Aviation images blog site (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
NASS ­ Photo
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,884 posts
Likes: 352
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Westmoreland Co., PA
     
Apr 10, 2016 18:24 |  #43

Alan and Skip. The reason I said medium format is because that I do not want to say 6x4.5 transparency when I am scanning those and then say 6x6 transparency, since I shot with Bronica Etrs and Sq bodies. Maybe, when all have been scanned, I will say that I finally scanned all my transparencies. Thank you both for sharing your knowledge. I am always willing to learn and better myself. Nick


NickS

Canon 5DMIII; Canon EF35mm, f/1.4L; EF85mm, f/1.8; EF135mm, f/2.0L; EF200mm, f/2.8L.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SkipD
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
20,476 posts
Likes: 158
Joined Dec 2002
Location: Southeastern WI, USA
     
Apr 10, 2016 19:27 |  #44

Nick, when I had access to a very old family photo as a 4x5 b;ack and white negative, I pondered for a bit about how to duplicate it in digital form. What I did was make up a holder out of some opaque cardboard and supported that in front of and a couple of feet from a softbox with a studio flash unit in it. I set up my camera with my 24-70 on an extension tube. The result was fantastic. Being black and white, all I had to do was reverse the image in photoshop. Now, I have better ideas of what to do with color negatives. I think I'd try this sort of setup with medium format negatives or slides. If the support holder is made appropriately, I would imagine that production could be at quite a good rate.


Skip Douglas
A few cameras and over 50 years behind them .....
..... but still learning all the time.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
NASS ­ Photo
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,884 posts
Likes: 352
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Westmoreland Co., PA
     
Apr 18, 2016 11:52 |  #45

Skip. Thanks for the info. I will try it out.


NickS

Canon 5DMIII; Canon EF35mm, f/1.4L; EF85mm, f/1.8; EF135mm, f/2.0L; EF200mm, f/2.8L.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

6,721 views & 3 likes for this thread
What brand 120mm scanner do I need
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is keke10
1297 guests, 276 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.