Epson 4490 Scanner - Tests and Settings.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Harry Stottle
  • Start date Start date
H

Harry Stottle

I have just put my first results from the Epson 4490 scanner on the
following link. I have also included the settings I used on the scanner,
to help anyone struggling to set the scanner up. This is using the
supplied Epson Scan software, which as far as I can see, seems to be
doing a pretty good job.

http://www.photoscan.150m.com/
 
I have just put my first results from the Epson 4490 scanner on the
following link. I have also included the settings I used on the scanner,
to help anyone struggling to set the scanner up. This is using the
supplied Epson Scan software, which as far as I can see, seems to be
doing a pretty good job.

http://www.photoscan.150m.com/
Click to expand...

I enjoyed this
 
Harry Stottle said:
I have just put my first results from the Epson 4490 scanner on the
following link. I have also included the settings I used on the scanner,
to help anyone struggling to set the scanner up. This is using the
supplied Epson Scan software, which as far as I can see, seems to be
doing a pretty good job.

http://www.photoscan.150m.com/
Click to expand...

Nice, I already have this scanner myself, and find it very good value
indeed. I'm currently rescanning all my old photos off the negatives
with it, and you can easily see the difference between a scan from a
print and a negative. A well worthwhile purchase.
 
Nice, I already have this scanner myself, and find it very good value
indeed. I'm currently rescanning all my old photos off the negatives
with it, and you can easily see the difference between a scan from a
print and a negative. A well worthwhile purchase.
Click to expand...


In a way this is a sad situation.
I mean -- I've been there and done that.

I've got some slides and negatives that
have been through three generations of
film scanners.

If you ever see one of your sharp negatives
or slides scanned on (say) an LS-9000 or a
drum scanner -- you're going to want to re-scan
all your old stuff one more time.

The 4990 is a great value but not in the same
league.


rafe b
www.terrapinphoto.com
 
Raphael Bustin said:
In a way this is a sad situation.
I mean -- I've been there and done that.

I've got some slides and negatives that
have been through three generations of
film scanners.

If you ever see one of your sharp negatives
or slides scanned on (say) an LS-9000 or a
drum scanner -- you're going to want to re-scan
all your old stuff one more time.
Click to expand...

In my case, that isn't likely to happen.
The 4990 is a great value but not in the same
league.
Click to expand...

Indeed not, it wasn't being compared to any such, or anything else come
to that, it was being shown for its own merits. If you can't afford to
spend a four figured sum on a 'Pro' scanner, or indeed simply don't have
the need to, then the 4490 is quite adequate for modest needs.

A lot of my old negatives are now pretty shabby anyway, and I feel I've
probably got the best I can out of them anyway. They are definitely
better than the equally old prints I have, and scanning at higher
resolutions isn't going to improve them much.

For perfect picture quality, I now use a DSLR.
 
"For perfect picture quality, I now use a DSLR."
I found your picture nice.
What kind of DSLR are you using?
 
"The 4990 is a great value but not in the same
league"
I hear you. Your photos gallery is impressive. Let see your league and
compare it with the 4990 histogram for histogram.
 
"The 4990 is a great value but not in the same
league"
I hear you. Your photos gallery is impressive. Let see your league and
compare it with the 4990 histogram for histogram.
Click to expand...


??? What exactly would you like to compare?

IMO, there's no point comparing histograms,
because color content is so variable and subjective.
Lack of skill or care can easily screw up a histogram,
even with the best of scanners. Furthermore (to
some extent) histograms can be messed up (or
fixed up) in post-processing.

There is some point to comparing sharpness and
resolution, which I have done (see URL below.)


rafe b
scan snippets:
http://www.terrapinphoto.com/jmdavis/
 
??? What exactly would you like to compare?

A picture taking by the same camera and scanned with your scanner and then
with the 4490.
Also an old 120 black and white negative previewed at 8 bits and 16 bits
gray scale And then scan at 600 - 2400 dpi and then enlarged. The quality
of the enlargement should provide ground for discussion between both
scanner.
BTW, I am not trying to denigrate your scanner. The purchasing cost of the
4490 is much lower. If I use cost to evaluation quality then the 4490 is of
a lower quality. At this time, I cannot evaluate the dependability of the
4490. It may only last a year of two or better? The other question is what
is quality and how do we describe it. When designing or buying how much
should I spend for more quality. If I spent 50% more and only get 10% more
in quality it becomes a matter of preference.
 
"For perfect picture quality, I now use a DSLR."
I found your picture nice.
What kind of DSLR are you using?
Click to expand...

I have an Olympus E-500.

Although most of the pictures on my site were taken with compacts -
mainly a Minolta Z1, and more recently a Panasonic Lumix FZ7.
 
??? What exactly would you like to compare?

A picture taking by the same camera and scanned with your scanner and then
with the 4490.
Also an old 120 black and white negative previewed at 8 bits and 16 bits
gray scale And then scan at 600 - 2400 dpi and then enlarged. The quality
of the enlargement should provide ground for discussion between both
scanner.
BTW, I am not trying to denigrate your scanner. The purchasing cost of the
4490 is much lower. If I use cost to evaluation quality then the 4490 is of
a lower quality. At this time, I cannot evaluate the dependability of the
4490. It may only last a year of two or better? The other question is what
is quality and how do we describe it. When designing or buying how much
should I spend for more quality. If I spent 50% more and only get 10% more
in quality it becomes a matter of preference.
Click to expand...


You'll find a few such comparisons on my scan-snippets site.
(Epson 4990 vs. Coolscan 8000.)

The 4490 should give the same resolution and image
quality; its main limitation will be max the scan area.

I have said repeatedly that the 4990 is a good value. From
what I've seen, it's roughly on par with the 2700 dpi film
scanners from about 5 years ago. I paid $1350 for one
of those, way back then... and it could only scan 35 mm.

The OP had talked about wanting to rescan all his/her
originals.... and I can surely relate to that.


rafe b
www.terrapinphoto.com
 
- said:
The old Franka is doing itself proud at 50 years!
Click to expand...

It's the rangefinder version, and when a friend gave me the camera,
without any instructions, I was wondering if it was even worth buying a
film to try it out, but the cheap film and processing costs persuaded
me. I then managed to work out what to do with it, i.e. load and wind on
the film manually, whilst carefully checking the frame number in the
window, close the cover for the window, set distance using the
rangefinder, transfer that distance to the lens, take a light reading,
or guess, set aperture on the lens, set speed on the lens, then cock the
shutter, and I was ready to take the shot. I knew I was bound to forget
something and I did, I forgot to close the window over the frame number,
but it didn't have any adverse effects on the image. The compact size of
the camera when folded was a real bonus.

I'm glad I decided to try it out now, as it was a very cheap way of
getting in to medium format photography. Total initial costs being,
camera £0.00, (but usually picked up for about £30 on Ebay), out dated
slide film, £1.00 from Ebay, and processing for the slide film £3.34, so
the £158 outlay for the scanner was the most expensive part, but the
results are much better than I expected.
 
Harry Stottle said:
I have just put my first results from the Epson 4490 scanner on the
following link. I have also included the settings I used on the
scanner, to help anyone struggling to set the scanner up. This is using
the supplied Epson Scan software, which as far as I can see, seems to
be doing a pretty good job.

http://www.photoscan.150m.com/
Click to expand...

If anyone gets the daily usage exceeded message, try here

http://www.photonipulation.0catch.com/ (sorry about the adverts).
 
I have used your settings for color positive film with success.
Have you started to scan black and white film yet. Now I am playing with
black and white and grey scale learning the ropes.
 
Thanks for the information.
Although I am been taking picture for decades I only have use digital
cameras for 3 years.
At this time, I am looking at getting a Panasonic DMC - FZ50K.
I like the SLR but I do not like carrying extra lenses for bird photography
or sailboat racing.
 
I have used your settings for color positive film with success.
Have you started to scan black and white film yet. Now I am playing
with black and white and grey scale learning the ropes.
Click to expand...

I have scanned slides, colour negatives, and also black and white
negatives using similar settings to the ones given, and all have given
good results.

If anyone has a better site to host the settings and test images, please
feel free to use the information and images from one of the free sites,
and post a link here.
 
Raphael said:
If you ever see one of your sharp negatives
or slides scanned on (say) an LS-9000 or a
drum scanner -- you're going to want to re-scan
all your old stuff one more time.
Click to expand...

I've been really pleased with value offered by the 4490
myself; it's quite a bargain for MF scanning. The truth
be told, I get a nagging feeling there's an LS-9000 in
the future for me, but the 4490 is good enough to help
defer that eventuality.

Dana
 
Thanks for the information.
Although I am been taking picture for decades I only have use digital
cameras for 3 years.
At this time, I am looking at getting a Panasonic DMC - FZ50K.
I like the SLR but I do not like carrying extra lenses for bird photography
or sailboat racing.
Click to expand...

I'd definitely recommend the Panasonic, I only upgraded to the E-500
when I found I couldn't get the control I wanted using a compact. I
still have the FZ7 though, it's great for video, and general shots. I'd
have a look at the outgoing FZ30 too, these are still a damn fine
camera.
 
I have just put my first results from the Epson 4490 scanner on the
following link. I have also included the settings I used on the scanner,
to help anyone struggling to set the scanner up. This is using the
supplied Epson Scan software, which as far as I can see, seems to be
doing a pretty good job.

http://www.photoscan.150m.com/
Click to expand...

It's normal to use gamma 2.2 on Mac also these days...

-espen

PS: Your site throwed malware at me, check your advertising
conncetion. ds
 
Back
Top