If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
scanning colour slides
I am not ready to dismiss the flatbed scanner yet.
yes, Nikon has the popular vote to be one of the best if not the best. I would like to compare some sample gallery of 40 years old slides scanned with an Nikon and Epson perfection 4490. That would confirm that the dedicated scanner is the best tool for the job or it may shown some interesting results for the Epson flatbed scanner? "Ockham's Razor" wrote in message ... In article , Gregory Blank wrote: In article NGhkh.526319$5R2.237872@pd7urf3no, gA wrote: Is it possible to scan colour slides into a digital format, with a flatbed scanner? I have a Umax Astra 4000U without a transparency adapter. Any help appreciated. Thanks. - gA You need a flatbed scanner with a transparency adapter. If he values the content of the slides he is scanning he will use a dedicated slide/film strip scanner. There is a Nikon for about 600.00 that beats every flat bed scanner out there. For higher level work there are even more capable scanners. And, use Vue Scan software. -- "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross." Sinclair Lewis |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
scanning colour slides
wrote: I am not ready to dismiss the flatbed scanner yet. yes, Nikon has the popular vote to be one of the best if not the best. I would like to compare some sample gallery of 40 years old slides scanned with an Nikon and Epson perfection 4490. That would confirm that the dedicated scanner is the best tool for the job or it may shown some interesting results for the Epson flatbed scanner? Here's what I got comparing _someone else's scan on a 4800 ppi Epson_ with my scan on a Nikon 8000 (which is a 4000 ppi scanner for medium format) of the same slide. http://www.pbase.com/davidjl/image/40078324/original http://www.pbase.com/davidjl/image/40078325 There's a world of difference _when viewed at full resolution_, both in terms of highlight detail and shadow detail. This is a recent Provia 100F slide taken with one of the best medium format lenses ever made (the Mamiya 43/4.5 for the Mamiya 7). Remember, YMMV. (In particular, some people think the Epsons can do better than this, although I don't.) David J. Littleboy Tokyo, Japan |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
scanning colour slides
Thank you all for providing answers. It's obvious, by the sanples,
that the Nikon 8000 produces the best quality. However, I feel a little uncomfortable spending all that money (approx. $750 CAD) for one-time conversion. I won't be taking any more slides and once the conversion is over, I will find out that the project was indeed an expensive proposition. Cheers, - gA David J. Littleboy wrote: wrote: I am not ready to dismiss the flatbed scanner yet. yes, Nikon has the popular vote to be one of the best if not the best. I would like to compare some sample gallery of 40 years old slides scanned with an Nikon and Epson perfection 4490. That would confirm that the dedicated scanner is the best tool for the job or it may shown some interesting results for the Epson flatbed scanner? Here's what I got comparing _someone else's scan on a 4800 ppi Epson_ with my scan on a Nikon 8000 (which is a 4000 ppi scanner for medium format) of the same slide. http://www.pbase.com/davidjl/image/40078324/original http://www.pbase.com/davidjl/image/40078325 There's a world of difference _when viewed at full resolution_, both in terms of highlight detail and shadow detail. This is a recent Provia 100F slide taken with one of the best medium format lenses ever made (the Mamiya 43/4.5 for the Mamiya 7). Remember, YMMV. (In particular, some people think the Epsons can do better than this, although I don't.) David J. Littleboy Tokyo, Japan |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
scanning colour slides
On Tue, 26 Dec 2006 23:47:40 GMT, gA wrote:
Thank you for your quick reply, Jonesy. I should have asked "what is the best and cheapest way to convert slides to digital". I saw your device and I am impressed by the quality of the result. Point of order: You did not see _my_ device. That URL covered the original work of someone else. I merely reproduced the "prior art". But, my device does not deviate much from what yoy see at that URL. So, FWIW, the results are reproducible. Is there any improvement that can be made to this procedure? I believe the inside of the tube should be painted flat black. You wouldn't think that *cardboard* would present a reflection problem, but it does. Or, at least I saw it in my implementation. GL with your project. Jonesy -- Marvin L Jones | jonz | W3DHJ | linux 38.24N 104.55W | @ config.com | Jonesy | OS/2 *** Killfiling google posts: http//jonz.net/ng.htm |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
scanning colour slides
Thanks for taking the time to reply to this post.
Is the left view scanned with an Epson 4870 and the right view with the Nikon 8000? "David J. Littleboy" wrote in message ... wrote: I am not ready to dismiss the flatbed scanner yet. yes, Nikon has the popular vote to be one of the best if not the best. I would like to compare some sample gallery of 40 years old slides scanned with an Nikon and Epson perfection 4490. That would confirm that the dedicated scanner is the best tool for the job or it may shown some interesting results for the Epson flatbed scanner? Here's what I got comparing _someone else's scan on a 4800 ppi Epson_ with my scan on a Nikon 8000 (which is a 4000 ppi scanner for medium format) of the same slide. http://www.pbase.com/davidjl/image/40078324/original http://www.pbase.com/davidjl/image/40078325 There's a world of difference _when viewed at full resolution_, both in terms of highlight detail and shadow detail. This is a recent Provia 100F slide taken with one of the best medium format lenses ever made (the Mamiya 43/4.5 for the Mamiya 7). Remember, YMMV. (In particular, some people think the Epsons can do better than this, although I don't.) David J. Littleboy Tokyo, Japan |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
scanning colour slides
What seems to be the trend is that people buy the Nikon 8000 second hand or
new Once their project is completed they sale it. "gA" wrote in message news:iRkkh.526945$5R2.192515@pd7urf3no... Thank you all for providing answers. It's obvious, by the sanples, that the Nikon 8000 produces the best quality. However, I feel a little uncomfortable spending all that money (approx. $750 CAD) for one-time conversion. I won't be taking any more slides and once the conversion is over, I will find out that the project was indeed an expensive proposition. Cheers, - gA David J. Littleboy wrote: wrote: I am not ready to dismiss the flatbed scanner yet. yes, Nikon has the popular vote to be one of the best if not the best. I would like to compare some sample gallery of 40 years old slides scanned with an Nikon and Epson perfection 4490. That would confirm that the dedicated scanner is the best tool for the job or it may shown some interesting results for the Epson flatbed scanner? Here's what I got comparing _someone else's scan on a 4800 ppi Epson_ with my scan on a Nikon 8000 (which is a 4000 ppi scanner for medium format) of the same slide. http://www.pbase.com/davidjl/image/40078324/original http://www.pbase.com/davidjl/image/40078325 There's a world of difference _when viewed at full resolution_, both in terms of highlight detail and shadow detail. This is a recent Provia 100F slide taken with one of the best medium format lenses ever made (the Mamiya 43/4.5 for the Mamiya 7). Remember, YMMV. (In particular, some people think the Epsons can do better than this, although I don't.) David J. Littleboy Tokyo, Japan |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
scanning colour slides
wrote in message ... Thanks for taking the time to reply to this post. Is the left view scanned with an Epson 4870 and the right view with the Nikon 8000? The good side's the 8000. http://www.pbase.com/davidjl/image/40078324/original http://www.pbase.com/davidjl/image/40078325 David J. Littleboy Tokyo, Japan |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
scanning colour slides
It looks that the Nikon 8000 is superior to the Epson 4890.
Too bad I just bought an Epson 4490. Nikon.ca are showing no Nikon 8000 but instead they have a 9000 with a mrsp of $2599.95 CAD before taxes. They have the 5000 at $1339.95CAD and the V ED at $739.95 CAD. In order to have a comparable match produced by the Nikon 8000 I would have to purchase the 9000. Or maybe the V ED at $739.95 CAD can perform the same as the 9000 which I have some doubt? wrote in message ... Thanks for taking the time to reply to this post. Is the left view scanned with an Epson 4870 and the right view with the Nikon 8000? "David J. Littleboy" wrote in message ... wrote: I am not ready to dismiss the flatbed scanner yet. yes, Nikon has the popular vote to be one of the best if not the best. I would like to compare some sample gallery of 40 years old slides scanned with an Nikon and Epson perfection 4490. That would confirm that the dedicated scanner is the best tool for the job or it may shown some interesting results for the Epson flatbed scanner? Here's what I got comparing _someone else's scan on a 4800 ppi Epson_ with my scan on a Nikon 8000 (which is a 4000 ppi scanner for medium format) of the same slide. http://www.pbase.com/davidjl/image/40078324/original http://www.pbase.com/davidjl/image/40078325 There's a world of difference _when viewed at full resolution_, both in terms of highlight detail and shadow detail. This is a recent Provia 100F slide taken with one of the best medium format lenses ever made (the Mamiya 43/4.5 for the Mamiya 7). Remember, YMMV. (In particular, some people think the Epsons can do better than this, although I don't.) David J. Littleboy Tokyo, Japan |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
scanning colour slides
gA wrote: Is it possible to scan colour slides into a digital format, with a flatbed scanner? I have a Umax Astra 4000U without a transparency adapter. Any help appreciated. Thanks. - gA What do you intend to do with the scanned images. Like most processes, the cost of the duplication process increases exponentially as the quality of the result. If you don't have a whole lot of slides (say 100-300) you can send them off and have them scanned pretty inexpensively. See: http://www.discountdigitalart.com/slides.html Scanning a lot of slides is a real PIA and a real time consumer. Bob Williams |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
scanning colour slides
wrote: It looks that the Nikon 8000 is superior to the Epson 4890. Too bad I just bought an Epson 4490. Not at all. The 4490 should be more than you need for web and smaller prints. You may even be happy with 8x10 prints. And you can learn about scanning without spending gobs of money. Nikon.ca are showing no Nikon 8000 but instead they have a 9000 with a mrsp of $2599.95 CAD before taxes. Sorry. Nikon makes two scanner lines: one for up to 24x36 mm slides, and one for up to 56x83mm slides. The 8000 and 9000 are the big ones. I have the 8000, the 9000 is the newer model. But if you only have 35mm slides, you don't need the 9000. You only need the 5000 or the V. They have the 5000 at $1339.95CAD and the V ED at $739.95 CAD. In order to have a comparable match produced by the Nikon 8000 I would have to purchase the 9000. Or maybe the V ED at $739.95 CAD can perform the same as the 9000 which I have some doubt? Yes. The V is a good scanner. The 9000 is only expensive because it handles much larger film. David J. Littleboy Tokyo, Japan |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Scanning 110 slides | David Dyer-Bennet | Digital Photography | 11 | March 20th 06 05:54 PM |
old slides and scanning | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 10 | March 19th 05 05:24 AM |
Scanning slides | Scar | Other Photographic Equipment | 6 | February 25th 05 03:58 AM |
Scanning slides | Uno Hoo! | Digital Photography | 32 | December 15th 04 09:09 PM |
Scanning Slides | Ed Mullikin | Digital Photography | 8 | October 13th 04 11:27 AM |