Best scanner for 6x6

[coa_lund]

about scanning 6x6 negs and slides

I have a Nikon super coolscan 9000 since 2007 and I think this gives quite satisfactory result. Of course I have gradually learnt how to scan.

Perhaps it could be of interest to tell my experience

I have learnt the hard way that it is very important to scan i 16 bits
and save in tiff format. I usually scan in the highest resolution 4000 dpi
and then interpolate down to 3200 in photoshop. The tiff files are then about 300Mb for color pics and 100 Mb bw. For 35 mm negs and slides I keep the 4000 dpi resolution.

For color pics I have then found Photoshop Camera raw to be most useful.
In that way I keep original data untouched and camera raw has quite powerful tools for color balance, brighness, contrast, sharpening etc. The processed result I usually save in jpeg, but I can always go back to the tiff file and save the edited result in other formats if need be. (The raw editing instructions get saved inside the original tiff file.)

For bw pics I various adjustment layers for making the editing reversible,
with the exception of the unavoidable spotting which I usually do irreversibly on the original tiff file (Unfortunately the digital ICE does not work for black and white.)

A Hasselblad neg is about 55x55 mm and the maximum width of the scanner is 57 mm, so I can keep a black border around the picture. The negs from my old Super Ikonta and Rolleiflex are wider, however, and here there is no way to include any border of unexposed film.

In order to get sharp scans from 120 film with the Nikon scanner the negative holder with glass is more or less mandatory. There are of course disadvantages with adding more glass/air surfaces; I have seen that there are 3rd party holders for liquid scans but I have no experience with these.

Finally I should mention that I also change the exif data and in particular the time stamp using exiftools. (Photoshop does not allow for such changes)

coa_lund

 

[Fliger747]

I have both the Epson V750 Pro and a Nikon LS8000. The Epson came along first and does pretty well, though might comment in scanning negatives, especially silver B&W that sometimes less is more. You will eventually find that at some point you are merely scanning the grain and not achieving any more useful resolution, and may actually have a less positive result.

I aquired the Nikon, sadly at the estate sale of a good friend. He had mentioned earlier that just be persistent.... It does a very nice job and with the glass carrier a good job of keeping the negatives very flat.

The nub of the matter is you probably can't find a new Nikon scanner, they seem to have lost interest in the technology. I use the Nikon for most of my 6x6 negatives and slides, but the Epson will give you a decent 16" print, right up on par with what you could do with an enlarger.

Good luck. T
Good luck. T

 

[snaporaz]

Epson V500

To have some cost saving, wath you think about Epson V500?
Someone has any experience?

 

[polarcircle]

Thanks for the info. What would the difference be between the Epson and the Nikon?

I have both the Epson V750 Pro and a Nikon LS8000. The Epson came along first and does pretty well, though might comment in scanning negatives, especially silver B&W that sometimes less is more. You will eventually find that at some point you are merely scanning the grain and not achieving any more useful resolution, and may actually have a less positive result.

I aquired the Nikon, sadly at the estate sale of a good friend. He had mentioned earlier that just be persistent.... It does a very nice job and with the glass carrier a good job of keeping the negatives very flat.

The nub of the matter is you probably can't find a new Nikon scanner, they seem to have lost interest in the technology. I use the Nikon for most of my 6x6 negatives and slides, but the Epson will give you a decent 16" print, right up on par with what you could do with an enlarger.

Good luck. T
Good luck. T

 

[Fliger747]

The Nikon is a traditional box with a film carrier slot type film and negative scanner, in this case a FireWire setup. There are a myriad of different holders for it and negative masks which the scanner reads and positions itself to scan only the opening. The optical resolution is higher than the flatbed but it will not scan items other than film. The glass carrier works very well in keeping the neg flat but lots of surfaces to clean and keep dust free.

The Epson is a teaditional style flatbed for documents etc but does a nice job with large negatives. For most 6x6 it is ok but for curved negatives one must use the liquid mount system. Works well, just a PITA. Works quite well for 4x5 and larger negs and prints.

If you also want to scan 35 mm the flatbed isn't quite up to the task for really fine work.

Good luck. T

 

[polarcircle]

OK,

I have an Epson V700. Have mostly been using it for MF negatives and slides. You found that the Nikon is recovering more detail. This should of course be the case for MF negatives and not only for 35 mm - right?

How large is the difference in dynamic range - not this stuff about 48 bits etc which is usually quite misleading - but about resolving darker and lighter areas in the negatives?

Cheers

The Nikon is a traditional box with a film carrier slot type film and negative scanner, in this case a FireWire setup. There are a myriad of different holders for it and negative masks which the scanner reads and positions itself to scan only the opening. The optical resolution is higher than the flatbed but it will not scan items other than film. The glass carrier works very well in keeping the neg flat but lots of surfaces to clean and keep dust free.

The Epson is a teaditional style flatbed for documents etc but does a nice job with large negatives. For most 6x6 it is ok but for curved negatives one must use the liquid mount system. Works well, just a PITA. Works quite well for 4x5 and larger negs and prints.

If you also want to scan 35 mm the flatbed isn't quite up to the task for really fine work.

Good luck. T

 

[Fliger747]

According to the advertising folks the Nikon scanner should have a higher dynamic range, but as I said before the Epson does pretty well. The 750 pro came with the rather sophisticated silverfast software which helps. The Nikon, being a generation or two of computer operating systems behind led me into using Vuescan, which though not as sophisticated is satisfactory. I haven't tried it but you might be able to use HDR type techniques on some of the denser negatives.

However nothing quite like a good negative to start with. Friends who have used the glass liquid mount system with the 750 Pro have been quite happy with the results. The fluids are hard to get in Alaska because they must be shipped as Hazmat.

The Epson will do about as well as enlarger technology as far as sharpness and capturing what is on the negative.

Nice to have both but perhaps a luxury?

Good luck. T

 

[HassyLover]

I use a Nikon Super CoolScan LS8000 and Nikon Scan software to scan both my MF and 35mm negatives and transparencies. The scanner is no longer made and requires a firewire card and XP (Nikon's scanning programs are not compatible with any OS newer than XP so I have a dedicated older laptop for just the scanner) but it produces phenomenal scans and the digital ICE does a terrific job of removing dust spots. The scanners can be found used, I got mine of Fleabay a number of years ago, but even used they are expensive ($1000-1500). I had an Epson V700 before it and to be honest, the Nikon blew it out of the water in terms of scan quality.

 

[Fliger747]

I use a Nikon Super CoolScan LS8000 and Nikon Scan software to scan both my MF and 35mm negatives and transparencies. The scanner is no longer made and requires a firewire card and XP (Nikon's scanning programs are not compatible with any OS newer than XP so I have a dedicated older laptop for just the scanner) but it produces phenomenal scans and the digital ICE does a terrific job of removing dust spots. The scanners can be found used, I got mine of Fleabay a number of years ago, but even used they are expensive ($1000-1500). I had an Epson V700 before it and to be honest, the Nikon blew it out of the water in terms of scan quality.

Most of the negatives I scan on the Nikon are B&W so the digital,ice is not useful. Nice though for the slides. My lady has been using it lately for scanning and restoring ancient family slides. The B&W prints I have made with either scanner are at least the quality I was able to do in the darkroom, with some advantages. Digital B&W printing is surprisingly more demanding than color work. An inversion from the old days. If I though film was better I would probably be shooting it, I do have quite a bit still on hand.

T

 

[blowupster]

Well I use the Braun FS 120 and happy with it now, but I've no experience with other serious scanners to compare. A bad point is that it does not exist now a holder for "xpan film".