Is dedicated film scanner FASTER than flatbed scanner?

  • Thread starter Thread starter silenceseeker2003
  • Start date Start date
S

silenceseeker2003

Greetings,

I have been using my "EPSON Perfection 3200 PHOTO" for archiving my
collection of 35mm negatives. So far I managed to scan only a few dozen
rolls, since cleaning the film, the scanner glass, placing the film in
the special adapter, etc. takes a lot of time.

I came to the conclusion that *if* a reasonbly priced dedicated film
scanner (like the DiMAGE Scan Dual III) saves me all this work by
somehow elminating the need to clean the scanner glass, easily
accepting film (instead of that el-cheapo plastic adapter), etc. - the
extra investment would be well worth the time saved.

But... before going ahead and purchasing one, I need to know that this
is indeed going to make a BIG difference in terms of my labor (I know
about the quality difference but currently this is not a factor).

Could you please share experience/knowledge regarding this issue? If
you know about a specific film scanner that is especially good at
saving operator time, please recommend it here.

Thanks!
Sam
 
Greetings,

I have been using my "EPSON Perfection 3200 PHOTO" for archiving my
collection of 35mm negatives. So far I managed to scan only a few dozen
rolls, since cleaning the film, the scanner glass, placing the film in
the special adapter, etc. takes a lot of time.

I came to the conclusion that *if* a reasonbly priced dedicated film
scanner (like the DiMAGE Scan Dual III) saves me all this work by
somehow elminating the need to clean the scanner glass, easily
accepting film (instead of that el-cheapo plastic adapter), etc. - the
extra investment would be well worth the time saved.

But... before going ahead and purchasing one, I need to know that this
is indeed going to make a BIG difference in terms of my labor (I know
about the quality difference but currently this is not a factor).

Could you please share experience/knowledge regarding this issue? If
you know about a specific film scanner that is especially good at
saving operator time, please recommend it here.

Thanks!
Sam
Click to expand...

I have used both the Konica-Minolta film scanners Scan Dual IV and the
Scan Elite 5400.
The SDIV doesn't have Digital ICE, and the SE5400 does. This is the
biggest difference between them. It saves you an enormous amount of
time if you don't have to remove all the specks and scratches in the
scans afterwards! It may be that scanning one 35mm negative takes about
13 minutes in the SE5400, but then it is finished - no scratches, no
dust, no work to do anymore!
The SE5400 is a lot more expensive than the SDIV, but I think it is
worth it. As for saving time: it takes me about 10 hours to scan a
negative film of 36 exposures, adjust the color and save the results to
disk. But then: I never get frustrated :))
Both scanners are probably much slower than the flatbed, but I guess
they will give you much, much sharper scans. I compared the film
scanners to my HP Scanjet 3570c that is said to scan 35mm film strips
or transparencies. Well: I found this scanner to be a lot more
inferior. The SDIV scans at a max resolution of 3200 ppi, the SE5400 at
5400 ppi and the HP scans effectively at 1200 or even less. That is not
clear to me, but at any rate much less than the film
scanners.
Greetings, Alex
 
Alex, thank you so much for your thoughtful and detailed answer. My
"EPSON Perfection 3200 PHOTO" flatbed also scans 35mm films at 3200dpi
and the results are satisfactory, but only if I invest the time to
clean scanner glass and to carefully place the negative strips in the
film adapter that comes with that scanner.

The scanning speed is not that important to me, since I just fire up
the scanner in batch mode and return when it is done (it takes about 4
minutes per negative at 3200 dpi).

What is most important to me is the operator's *handling* time. Could
you tell me please what are the steps required to insert 35mm negative
strip (with 4-6 negatives in it)?

Do you have to clean the scanner's glass between scans to make sure
that no spackle of dust somehow got in? (if the glass is horizontal, of
course it would be more sensitive to dust than a vertical one).

Is inserting the 35mm negative strip as easy as simply sliding it
through some slot?

Thanks,
Sam
 
Alex, thank you so much for your thoughtful and detailed answer. My
"EPSON Perfection 3200 PHOTO" flatbed also scans 35mm films at 3200dpi
and the results are satisfactory, but only if I invest the time to
clean scanner glass and to carefully place the negative strips in the
film adapter that comes with that scanner.

The scanning speed is not that important to me, since I just fire up
the scanner in batch mode and return when it is done (it takes about 4
minutes per negative at 3200 dpi).

What is most important to me is the operator's *handling* time. Could
you tell me please what are the steps required to insert 35mm negative
strip (with 4-6 negatives in it)?

Do you have to clean the scanner's glass between scans to make sure
that no spackle of dust somehow got in? (if the glass is horizontal, of
course it would be more sensitive to dust than a vertical one).

Is inserting the 35mm negative strip as easy as simply sliding it
through some slot?

Thanks,
Sam
Click to expand...
Sam, have a look at
http://konicaminolta.com/products/consumer/digital_camera/dimage/dimagescan-elite5400-2/04.html

You'll probably see how easy it is to use the film scanners.
In short:
a film strip is inserted into a glassless holder. The scan program
running, the holder is inserted into the scanner. You tell the program
what to do...

No glass, no cleaning, nothing. I have some very old (1959) Kodacolor
film, badly scratched and pitted and thumbed - they come out
beautifully!

Only the very deep scratches or the large pits cannot be corrected even
by ICE. But it is amazing what ICE *can* do.

Cheerio, H.D.
 
I like the Epson 4180 flatbed.

It scans at 4800 dpi and it scans 4 slides or 8 negatives at a
time.

And it is much faster than previous models. Your preview is
available almost immediately.

Of course you have to clean slides regardless. And you have some
control over your environment. A hepa?? filter in the room will
remove virtually all the 'stuff' that falls on your equipment.
 
The scanning speed is not that important to me, since I just fire up
the scanner in batch mode and return when it is done (it takes about 4
minutes per negative at 3200 dpi).<<

The newer flatbed scanners save more time because you can scan more frames
per batch and also offer ICE. Most dedicated film scanners will only take 1
cut strip of film. If your film is still in roll form and not cut, you
might want to look at one of the scanners that can take a roll adapter.

Doug
 
Thank you all very much for your valued contributions. I thought what he was
saying was a little odd re: little difference in resollution etc between the
epson 4870 and the Nikon V and Minolta Dimage 5400. The question now is
which is the better of the Nikon V or the Minolta Dimage 5400?

Cheers

Ron
 
Greetings,

I have been using my "EPSON Perfection 3200 PHOTO" for archiving my
collection of 35mm negatives. So far I managed to scan only a few dozen
rolls, since cleaning the film, the scanner glass, placing the film in
the special adapter, etc. takes a lot of time.

I came to the conclusion that *if* a reasonbly priced dedicated film
scanner (like the DiMAGE Scan Dual III) saves me all this work by
somehow elminating the need to clean the scanner glass, easily
accepting film (instead of that el-cheapo plastic adapter), etc. - the
extra investment would be well worth the time saved.
Click to expand...

I use a Nikon LS5000 ED at 4000 dpi and 8 bit color depth. Whether
using Nikon Scan, or VueScan it takes about 30 to 40 seconds when
Digital ICE is turned on. This des an excellent job of removing
scratches, dirt and finger prints. Still it's not a replacement for
having clean, or relatively clean film or slides.

I also have an HP 5470 with the slide/film adapter. It does a
creditable job, but I've not seen a flat bed yet that comes close to
matching the dedicated, high quality film/slide scanners.
It's also a nuisance as far as using a film, or slide holder compared
to just sticking the film into the scanner.
But... before going ahead and purchasing one, I need to know that this
is indeed going to make a BIG difference in terms of my labor (I know
about the quality difference but currently this is not a factor).
Click to expand...

There is batch feeding and then there is batch feeding. I do not
consider 4 or five images to be much of a batch. I've gone through
over 20,000 slides and negatives in the last year and still have a
bunch to go. I do have the SF210 *automated* slide feeder for the
LS5000 ED. You still have to be present and paying attention.
Could you please share experience/knowledge regarding this issue? If
you know about a specific film scanner that is especially good at
saving operator time, please recommend it here.
Click to expand...

After going over the literature on the different slide and film
scanners I ruled out all flat beds. It was down to basically the
Minolta and Nikon. There are also some commercial scanners out there,
but were I to do it again, I'd still pick the LS5000 ED.

Scanning programs: I haven't seen one yet that does everything
without a hitch now and then.

I happen to like VueScan and have not had any real problems outside of
some of my own making during a rather steep learning curve.
It does more and it is a tad more complicated to set up and use.

So, I use the Nikon for slides and film while the HP gets used for the
*old* prints as well as documents. There it is quite fast.

Scanning slides and film can be very time consuming and tedious if you
have many to do.

Good Luck

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com
 
Back
Top