Flatbed vs Film Scanners

  • Thread starter Thread starter One4All
  • Start date Start date
One4All said:
Even though it's a flatbed scanner, my Epson Perfection 4870 Photo's
specs exceed those of my Dimage Scan Multi II (not Pro): 48 bit-depth
vs 36; 3.8 Dmax vs 3.6; and 4800 optical resolution vs 2820.
Quality-wise, is there any reason my 4870 should not replace the Dimage
in all film formats, including 35-mm?
Click to expand...

I printed some 8x10's on my Epson 1280 scanner of an image of a
trombone lying across a score (you know, printed notes, etc.). The
trombone throws a shadow over some of the score. The trombone has
specular highlights.

The original color transparency was 35-mm. I scanned with the Dimage:
2820 dpi input resolution, 300 dpi output resolution. 36-bit color
depth. Image size was 2400 x 3000 pixels, 20.6 MB.
Saved as .tif.

I scanned with the 4870: input resolution unknown, since Epson Scan
does not ask for it. 300 dpi output resolution. 48-bit color depth.
Saved as .tif. Now. My PS Elements 2.0 could not handle 48-bit color
depth, so I guess I down-sampled that to 36-bit color depth in order to
print it out. Well, Elements handled the Dimage image, so I can only
assume the Epson image was down-sampled to 36-bit color depth.

Bottom line: Both images were printed at 2400 x 3000 pixels, file size
20.6 MB.

Result: Specular highlights were sharper with the Epson scan. Shadow
detail was more open with the Epson scan.

Cost: Dimage Scan Multi II, $2000. Epson Perfection 4870 Photo, under
$400.
 
- said:
Like Rafe said, you need to compare with your own eyes. Lots of
manufacturer's specification claims are "theoretical" at best. Dmax is a
good example. Please post back with your opinion because no doubt there are
a lot of people who would like to know your conclusions after doing a
Click to expand...
comparison!
Click to expand...

See my March 31 posting under this topic. Rafe took offense at my
findings, asking if I thought all of you were wrong. No, I don't. I
provided as much data as I could so someone might tell me what I did
wrong re: settings, etc. I've learned tons from these discussions and
hope to learn more.
 
One4All said:
When you go to www.photo-i.co.uk, click on reviews, then scanners, then
Epson 4870
Click to expand...

you may as well look at the 4990. It is only marginally better quality
wise but it looks like speed and ease of use and especially film holder
design has been improved. I don't know what the price differential is but
its worth looking into.

It will be either of those or the canon 9950 for me.
 
and ease of use and especially film holder design has been improved.

Same film holders as 4870 but with the added "mask" for 8x10 which actually
requires you to put the film directly on the glass.
 
Back
Top