[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/p/ - Photography

[Advertise on 4chan]

Name
Options
Comment
Verification
4chan Pass users can bypass this verification. [Learn More] [Login]
File
  • Please read the Rules and FAQ before posting.
  • There are 21 posters in this thread.

08/21/20New boards added: /vrpg/, /vmg/, /vst/ and /vm/
05/04/17New trial board added: /bant/ - International/Random
10/04/16New board for 4chan Pass users: /vip/ - Very Important Posts
[Hide] [Show All]


[Advertise on 4chan]


Is it worth it to get the 8200AI over the 8200SE?
The main advantage is the IT8 target which allows for proper colour calibration but I don't know how much actual difference this will make that can't be solved with colour correction in LR in post. I adjust the colours of pretty much all my photographs anyway to get them quite right.
>>
DSLR scanning
>>
File: Fujifilm-GFX-100S-Front.jpg (197 KB, 1180x787)
197 KB
197 KB JPG
>>4026139
Just buy a GFX100s and take pictures of them and then wah lah. You got 100MP film bro

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeCanon
Camera ModelCanon EOS 80D
Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Exposure Time1/200 sec
F-Numberf/11.0
ISO Speed Rating100
Lens Aperturef/11.0
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
FlashNo Flash
Focal Length100.00 mm
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeManual
White BalanceManual
>>
>>4026142
>>4026144
extreme baby brain takes when OP is talking about a Plustek.
>>
>>4026142
>>4026144
not interested in DSLR scanning because I don't plan on shooting digital, just seems like a bit of a waste. DSLR scanning is only really a good option for people who already have digital cameras.
The only digital camera I would get would be for shooting video and the minimum for something like that is a £700+ Lumix camera.
>>
>>4026148
>plustek
LOL
>>
>>4026144
100MP on 35mm film is completely pointless
>>
I just bought an Epson ET-2800
scanning is 1200dpi

i think its actually one of the better scanners you can get on an all-in-one printer

but how does it stack up to a dedicated thing like OP's pic
>>
>>4026218
You know nothing about enlargement. High megapixel counts are necessary for emulating the lossless scaling abilities of film
>>
>>4026139
Hey OP, some things I've learned from having a plustek scanner for a couple months now and scanning a fuckload of 126 film (square 35mm) and 35mm:

Plustek hasn't updated their hardware in a while. I have an older 7600i and it's functionally identical to the 8200i, it just has an older version of the Silverfast software packed in. I was able to pay a reduced upgrade cost to get to version 8 from version 6 or something like that.

The IT8 target is useful for calibrating once and then maybe again if you leave it off for a long time. It's not super critical if you're scanning raw files, but helps get your colors right if you use the built in film profiles to generate 24bit jpegs (which is a pretty common use case for most people, but I like to have the 64-bit raws instead).

Scanning is fucking slow, especially if you use both the multi-exposure (HDR) and infrared (ICE) features. The "HDR" feature is great but the ICE might not be worth it if your film is clean (mine is definitely not, being from the 50s to 90s). If I wasn't doing this for my family, I wouldn't be scanning every frame of every roll they gave me with both options turned on, but here I am sitting on my ass for 10 minutes per frame.
>>
>>4026305
You know nothing about viewing distance
>>
They're good IQ-wise, but painfully slow.

I ended up selling mine and getting a Frontier (got an amazing deal). Now I get a whole uncut roll scanned at maximum resolution (5350x3602) in a few minutes. My time is so worth it.
>>
>>4028176
Wish I could do that but all the negs I have to scan have been cut. Makes me wanna cry.
>>
>>4026139
Save a few bucks and get a Coolscan V or 5000 ED that will give quality scans that would make DSLRfags seethe.
>>4026142
Enjoy warped pictures, improper color rendering and lens distortion.
>>
>>4028162
Not all prints from 35mm film are intended for being viewed from 10ft away, I've seen low-MP prints blown up big on the ads at bus stops and they look jaggy and dated
>>
>>4026292
>how does it stack up to a dedicated thing like OP's pic
You can't scan film with yours
>>
File: mogs your path.png (534 KB, 1000x1000)
534 KB
534 KB PNG
>feed scanning, will automatically advances film as it scans
>27 megapixel true quality from scans
>similar price to plustek scanners
>gets quality of meme thousand dollar 2000s scanners for a fraction of the price
>dust scratch removal (DSLR scans lack this)
>>
>>4033471
>checks the am*zon reviews
>its shit
literally snake oil
>>
is my best bet as a poorfag a second hand epson v scanner? I don't have a digital camera and my only scanner is the built in one in a shitty old HP deskjet.
>>
>>4033543
I had a V scanner, they are far softer than a plustel. Film scanning is extremely cucked. Decent film scanners are priced extremely high. Even a basic cheapo microcontroller can transfer data fast enough for fast film scanning. I worked with a Flextight 949/Hasselbad X series scanner. You know that shit uses an Intel 486 cpu and SDRAM?
>>
>>4028581
You can also feed it short strips (4 or 5 frames)
>>
>>4033584
>>4033475

Seriously. Epson hasn't updated a lot of their drivers for older scanners to work with Windows fucking 10. Yes, 10.

You have to get vuescan or something similar which work but not that well. I bought an old 2450 with a 35mm auto advance slot, which is great but the software and drivers suck ass. Its cheaper to go dslr unless you want to spend at least 1000
>>
Whats the scanner with the best bang:buck ratio?
>>
>>4029550
>Save a few bucks and get a Coolscan V or 5000 ED that will give quality scans that would make DSLRfags seethe.
i used to use a 9000ed and would chose dslr scanning over it anyday
>>
>>4033716
there's no dslr that you can get for £50
>>
>>4026305
>lossless scaling abilities of film
Is this fucking bait?





Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.