On 5/1/2014 1:48 PM, Brian Gray wrote:
Hi
I am about to embark on getting some of my 50 year old slides scanned,
probably about 100 immediately, and several hundred more slides later
including some that are only 20 years old.
The digital images will normally be viewed on a computer monitor or
flat screen TV but I may want to project them onto a screen of about
1200 x 900 mm (4 x 3 ft if preferred).
The slides are a mixture of Kodachrome (64?), Ilfochrome, Agfa and
unidentified film in a mixture of card and plastic mounts (some
remounted by myself when the original glue deteriorated on cardboard
mounts)
Kodachrome is a different kettle of fish, as silver is left in the finished slide, and blocks IR. The rest are easily IR
cleanable.
My old Epson Perfection 1650 will no longer scan slides and would have
very poor resolution by modern standards anyway, so I have the choice
of buying a scanner (new or used) or using a commercial agency to
digitise the slides.
Commercial suppliers offer 2000, 3000, 4000 options with Digital ICE
offered either as standard or as an extra and I am tempted to use one
of the companies for the first batch of slides (at 4000 dpi) to see
what they actually do. This leads to my first question - is it correct
that Digital ICE is unlikely to be worthwhile on Kodachrome slides, as
suggested on some web-pages?
Both VueScan and SliverFast have recently claimed to greatly improve IR
cleaning of Kodachromes.
I had found long ago that one scan with IR cleaning and one without could sometimes be combined to good effect, using
the sky/light areas (where there is less silver) from the cleaned one and darker, more complex areas from the other.
I've wondered if this is part of their secret, selective application of cleaning within the image.
If I chose to purchase a new or secondhand scanner (eg on the 'bay) for
the bulk of the slides am I likely to be satisfied with the results
Nikons, used or not, offer high quality, but for some relatively subtle flare (per AG, CH and others) and sometimes
fussy focus.
Test results for the last Minolta were good, again with fussy focus (inadequate
DOF - slides aren't flat.)
The Canon FS4000 has a more diffuse light source, and thus tends not to emphasize scratches as much, esp. good for
Kodachrome, and has no focus problems at all.
Properly used, all of these are capable of better results than your stated requirements. Only some Nikons allow stack
loaders.
The Epson V series and Canon 9950F flatbed scanners aren't quite up to the dedicated film scanners, but allow much
larger batches at once.
Cano Scan Moose
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|