Epson 4870 discussion online

  • Thread starter Thread starter Robert D Feinman
  • Start date Start date
R

Robert D Feinman

I've added a discussion about the Epson 4870 to the tips section of my
web site. Since their have been several good reviews posted already I've
restricted myself to some comparisons of the resolution compared to
other scanners; specifically the Minolta 5400 and an older 1600 dpi
Epson flatbed.
So if you're looking for the answer to "should I upgrade from my older
flatbed?" I'm not sure I've answered your questions.
There are full sized samples as links that you can download and play
with if you wish.

Finally, let me say that the supplied epson scan software is only useful
for casual users (even in professional mode). There is also a copy of
Silverfast supplied which I'll try to get to soon.

I have tried Vuescan and it appears to work fine, but I'm still
struggling with the setup on how to mark multiple images on a flatbed.
 
Robert D Feinman said:
I've added a discussion about the Epson 4870 to the tips section of my
web site. Since their have been several good reviews posted already I've
restricted myself to some comparisons of the resolution compared to
other scanners; specifically the Minolta 5400 and an older 1600 dpi
Epson flatbed.
So if you're looking for the answer to "should I upgrade from my older
flatbed?" I'm not sure I've answered your questions.
There are full sized samples as links that you can download and play
with if you wish.
Click to expand...

Why didn't you add a sharped version of the Minolta Scan?

regards
Markus
 
Apparently Ed Hamrick hasn't added batch for the 4870 yet, hence my
confusion.
Click to expand...

Oh, that would make things a bit difficult then :) I didn't realize that.
BTW, I had an email from Ed today and he said the ICE system on the 4870 was
different from that found on film scanners, so he didn't think that Vuescan
would be able to take advantage of it.

Doug
 
- said:
BTW, I had an email from Ed today and he said the ICE system on the 4870 was
different from that found on film scanners, so he didn't think that Vuescan
would be able to take advantage of it.
Click to expand...

Oh <...censored...>!!!!! I've just ordered one. :-((

Ralf
 
Robert D Feinman said:
The Minolta doesn't really need it, at least when scanned at 5400 dpi.
Click to expand...

How do you define "doesn't need it"? I think the comparison is flawed
when taking an unmodified scan and a sharped one. Applying the same
amount of unsharp mask to the Minolta scan makes it look way better than
the sharpened Epson one.
Apropos sharping: I think that 200%, 4,8 radius sharpening isn't
realistic for "normal" slides/negatives. You can do that with b/w test
slides but surely not with photographic motives. IMHO of course.

regards
Markus
 
Markus Plail said:
How do you define "doesn't need it"? I think the comparison is flawed
when taking an unmodified scan and a sharped one. Applying the same
amount of unsharp mask to the Minolta scan makes it look way better than
the sharpened Epson one.
Click to expand...

It does already look way better than the Epson scan.

Bring us an axe and a hair...

Ralf
 
Oh <...censored...>!!!!! I've just ordered one. :-((

Ralf
Click to expand...
The Epson 4870 ICE is probably going to be of limited value. Epson
quotes a little over a minute for a 35mm scan and about 8.5 minutes with
ICE turned on. I tried it yesterday with a 6x7 transparency on my 450MHz
machine and the total process took about one hour at 2400 dpi.
I can clean up the dust by hand in most images in about 5 minutes..
 
Robert Feinman said:
The Epson 4870 ICE is probably going to be of limited value. Epson
quotes a little over a minute for a 35mm scan and about 8.5 minutes with
ICE turned on.
Click to expand...

Point taken. Thank you. Only adds to the generally most disappointing
picture. Just doing some comparisons between my old 2450 and the 4870
which has arrived today. The difference is marginal, at best, and that
in every respect. Resolution, speed, you name it.

Given that I've been unhappy with the 2450 since I've had it, I don't
think I'll want to spend more money for something which isn't much of an
improvement.

Pity, really....

Ralf
 
Ralf said:
Point taken. Thank you. Only adds to the generally most disappointing
picture. Just doing some comparisons between my old 2450 and the 4870
which has arrived today. The difference is marginal, at best, and that
in every respect. Resolution, speed, you name it.
Click to expand...
How is the quality of ICE on scans of photos? What are the timings like
in comparison to a standard 300 or 600 dpi scan with ICE off? Sounds
like ICE will be painfully slow on 4X5 slides at max. resolution, high bit.
Thankfully, I only have a few of these.

I have an opportunity to exchange my new Epson 3170 and get the 4870
for approx. double the price. Some of the comments here are causing me
to rethink this. I already have a Nikon 4000ED for 35mm slides.


Regards,

Scott
 
Campbell said:
How is the quality of ICE on scans of photos?
Click to expand...

I haven't tried ICE and I most probably won't, as I'm using Vuescan. I
had installed the Epson software for the 2450, some time ago and it
messed up Vuescan and a number of other things. I don't think I want to
go through that again.
I have an opportunity to exchange my new Epson 3170 and get the 4870
for approx. double the price. Some of the comments here are causing me
to rethink this. I already have a Nikon 4000ED for 35mm slides.
Click to expand...

As I said, the difference in quality to my 2450 is so small that I don't
think I'll keep the 4870. Yes, it is somewhat faster but that doesn't
cut it for me.

Still testing. Stay tuned.

Ralf
 
I tried it yesterday with a 6x7 transparency on my 450MHz machine and
the total process took about one hour at 2400 dpi. I can clean up the dust
by hand in most images in about 5 minutes..<<

To be fair, isn't the ICE processing extremely CPU processor intensive?
Like you, I also have a slower computer. I think if you had 2.0+ Pentium
type of computer which is fairly common today (you and I run dinosaurs!),
you would really see a dramatic reduction in times. Probably still no down
to your 5 minutes but I bet a lot closer than an hour. Just trying to put
things in perspective.

Doug
 
I have the 3200 model and as I've reported before, Vuescan is horribly
slower than the Epson software. On color Vuescan is a bit better but
in b&w I can't tell the difference.

If Epson has improved their software with their new hardware I'd
really like to hear about the race between Vuescan and Epson (with and
without ice activated)!
 
- said:
Oh, that would make things a bit difficult then :) I didn't realize that.
BTW, I had an email from Ed today and he said the ICE system on the 4870 was
different from that found on film scanners, so he didn't think that Vuescan
would be able to take advantage of it.
Click to expand...

I've since found out that the transparency adapter on the 4870
does indeed have an infrared option. I'm going to order a 4870
and add support for the infrared cleaning, probably in the next
week or so.

The batch scanning (of a rectangular array of images) should work
fine already. Just set "Crop|X images" and "Crop|Y images".

Regards,
Ed Hamrick
 
David R said:
I have the 3200 model and as I've reported before, Vuescan is horribly
slower than the Epson software. On color Vuescan is a bit better but
in b&w I can't tell the difference.
Click to expand...

I'm sure I could fix this, but "horribly slower" isn't descriptive
enough for me to isolate the problem.

VueScan does indeed use variable CCD exposure times, so it should
take longer to scan darker things than lighter things. You can
turn this off with the "Input|Lock exposure" option.

It should be faster with b&w, but I'd need to get a vuescan.log
file of a color scan and a b&w scan to be sure.

Regards,
Ed Hamrick
 
I've since found out that the transparency adapter on the 4870
does indeed have an infrared option. I'm going to order a 4870
and add support for the infrared cleaning, probably in the next
week or so.
Click to expand...

Great to hear!

Doug
 
Back
Top