Negative scanner - any recommendations.

I wasn't sure which forum to put this into since it isn't strictly speaking digital photography, but figured processing and printing was the closest. My apologies if I chose incorrectly.

I've got around 4-5 years of negatives sitting in two negative albums from back when I owned my EOS 5 that I would like to digitize. Does anyone have experience with negative scanners? Any recommendations re: hardware/software?

ideally I would like to be able to have meta data auto added to each image upon scan. For example, copyright, photographer name and my camera model - though this is not 100% required.

I have a Nikon V-ED which I'm sure can be now be had for a song on eBay or CL.

If you use Lightroom, you could set up an Auto Import routine via a watched folder and have a metadata preset applied at the time of import.

I'm sure others have different/better ideas.

In this end of the world, neg scanners now fall under four forms. 1) Cheap and sh*t. 2) Second hand Minolta or Nikon neg scanners in either 35mm or 120 format. 3) Good quality photo flatbeds. Notable mentions go to the new Canon 9000f and the the Epson V700/750 which is basically the benchmark for flatbeds. 4) Hasselblad drum scanners, which are awesome to use but very expensive.

Real world, look at option 3.

Nikon V ED as well.
VueScan for software. It can add "description", "copyright" and "date" metadata.

4-5 years of negatives are going to take a long time to scan!

Thanks for all the replies. Am looking around to see if I can find good ones locally (live in Korea) and not having much look. Ebay has a bunch of the cheapo craptastic ones but I don't trust those and any of the better listings won't ship out of the u.s.

René Damkot wrote in post #11124170
4-5 years of negatives are going to take a long time to scan!

Yes I know. But fortunately my job is pretty easy on the working hours 12 hours a week and 20 weeks of vacation so I have some spare time.

Macro lens and a negative carrier made up from a hacked apart old slide duplicator, works a treat.

Createsean wrote in post #11124024
Does anyone have experience with negative scanners? Any recommendations re: hardware/software?

I have an Epson V500 because I mostly do medium format scanning and the Nikon 9000 is getting very hard to find (and still very expensive). My workflow is:

1. Scan with VueScan (ICE on for color, off for B&W), 3 passes, multiexposure for negatives (higher dynamic range than slides)
   
2. Colors get passed to ColorPerfect for quick and accurate corrections (I strongly recommend it)
   
3. Import into Aperture with tags applied
   

Downsy wrote in post #11124217
Macro lens and a negative carrier made up from a hacked apart old slide duplicator, works a treat.

While good for a budget, it doesn't provide ICE, something I'd never do without for color negs or slides.

Have any of you any thoughts on this review of the 9000F which claims that the scanner only scans at 1700 dpi?
http://www.filmscanner​.info …mscannerTestber​ichte.html

I'd be curious wether they tried to focus the scanner better.
Seems that with Epson V500/700 this makes a big difference.

1700dpi seems on the low side.

I agree it does seem low, but if you have had the time to read about the test method and interpretation of results it makes a bit more sense. What the test is evaluating is qualitative, not quantitative. Basically they are looking for the discernible lpi and converting that to a dpi figure. The file size of the scans would suggest a much higher value in dpi.

My issue is that I would like to scan some 35mm negs. If I do, I want the capability to print to 13x19 inches. This requires at least 3900 dpi, assuming 300 dpi. I have printed to 250 dpi with nice results which would suggest I need but 3250 dpi. To be sure I want 4000 but this testing indicates that we need to look at the quality of the scan, not the hardware action.

I have looked at many reviews on the Internet and few mention whether the scan file was printed at a large size. If some one is printing to 4x6 inches, almost any scan will suffice.

I bought an Epson V600 for this effort. I really have not gotten into the task as my major photo processing computer died and priorities shifted. Preliminary tests indicate I will be satisfied with the digitizing results with this scanner, but I need to refine the workflow process for this immense task.
I have many years of B/W prints and negatives plus color slides to process.

Then, I understand, you have not yet printed any 35mm scans at large sizes?

I will only be doing 35mm b&w (with a few 6x6) and will not be attempting to do my entire file of negs. Just those few that really interest me. For that reason, I need a real quality scan.

I have the Epson v700 and according to ScanDig it only tests out at 2300 dpi even though its spec is 6400 dpi. I haven't done any printing yet. If you're adamant about wanting true 4000 dpi you're realistically going to need one of the higher end dedicated film scanners. Not even sure if Nikon still makes theirs anymore. If you're only wanting to do a limited number of scans I'd just send them out.

I use a Nikon V-ED and it does a good job, but it is a slow process. I'd estimate about 5 minutes/scan if you want to get it right. I have printed B-W prints up to 24x36 and they look great. But a word of warning: BW negatives are a PITA to scan. Much more difficult than color. Almost all negatives and slides have scratches and other imperfections that are very apparent when scanned. Most can be removed automatically with a process such as ICE which uses infra-red light to detect and remove the scratches during the scanning process. Unfortunately it does not work with B-W. Some use a process called wet scanning to help hide the scratches and other imperfections. I haven't tried this yet and instead spend a LOT of time in PS cleaning up the scans. Be prepared to spend up to an hour or more to clean up a B-W negative for a large print. I can post some examples if you are interested. Google "scanning black and white" for more detailed info.

Thanks to all of you for your good information. The reality seems to be that for the best results, you need to spend $$; no big surprise here.

I have decided to purchase the Canon 9000F for several reasons. Price. Quality as compared to others in the price range. Canon's warranty practice which I know to be superb.

I will evaluate Silverfast software (trial version) to see how it improves the scans.

If I am not pleased with the results on 35mm I can always sell the scanner used because most users don't use that feature and the reputation of this unit on larger subjects and graphics is superb. So, my risk is slight.