What's new
Medium Format Forum

Register a free account now!

If you are registered, you get access to the members only section, can participate in the buy & sell second hand forum and last but not least you can reserve your preferred username before someone else takes it.

Epson 3200 2450

Hi, Daniel.
Did you get 4870 Photo or Pro? I am also looking to buy a scanner. As I have accumulated quite a few 645 negs/slides from my H1. I may be wrong, but local lab scanned my images at 300 dpi and they were horrid. Did you try scanning same pic at different dpi, may be that will tell you more. Do post your findings, as that would really help me a lot. As I keep bouncing from Nikon 9000 or Epson 4870 can't decide which one.
Thanks
 
I have my 6*6 negatives and slide film scanned at 4500 pixels by 4500 pixels. It opens in photoshop as aproximately a 60 meg image. This is a little over 2000 pixels per inch. I usually make 11 X 14 inxh prints at 360 pixels per inch. If you dived your print dimensions by 300 or what ever you are printing at you will get the toatl number of pixels in that dimension. So the film scanning is at a much higher resolution than the final output.

James A. Bryant
 
Hi Daniel,

You should consider 2 things:

1. With most current photo 'printers', photographic quality is generally achieved at a DPI output of 200 or above. Note that most printers lie to you when you set the DPI of output. You will often see figures in the printer settings of 720 dpi or 1440 dpi. Keep in mind that these printers use a blended dot (interpolated output), so a 1440 dpi setting may in fact be only 240 blended dots per inch. If you want a photographic quality image at 8" x 10", then the original photo should be at least 2000 pixels (10" x 200 dpi) by 1600 pixels (8 x 200 dpi) in size.

2. If you are scanning, then the process goes the other way, the DPI setting relates to the final pixel size of the scanned image. If you put a 6" x 7" neg on the scanner and scan it at 300 dpi, the resulting digital image will be 1800 x 2100 pixels in size.

So you should be able to work it out from what size you want to print. for ex&le - if you want to print A3 (11.7" x 16.5") and we are playing on the safe side assuming we need 300 DPI for the printer, then follow this:

300 DPI x 11.7" = 3510 pixels
300 DPI x 16.5" = 4950 pixels

So to print that size you need an image (after scan) that is: 3510 x 4950 pixels (landscape)

If your neg is 6" x 7" then according to 2. above to achieve a scan large enough (or actually slightly larger due to the miss matched aspect rations of A3 paper and a 6x7 neg) to fill A3 you would need to scan at 707 DPI:

707 DPI x 6" = 4242 pixels
707 DPI x 7" = 4949 pixels

This would give you an image large enough to cover A3 at it largest width - you can then crop or shrink the image to fit at your leisure.

I only hope I havent confused you further!

Good luck,

Antony
 
Hi Shawn
I got the 4870 Photo. I have made a scan from a 6x6 slide off a Hassy. It was scanned at 1,200 dpi and I tweaked it very slightly with Photo-shop to color correct and crop. The picture was printed by my local printing lab. I have also done a scan from a panoramic neg [24 x 65mm] from my X-pan and had it printed to 12" x 24". I am pleased with the colours and results of both prints. They were sufficiently sharp and detailed. Though I have experimented with various settings, I am still trying to understand the dpi stuff.
Just read a message posted by James - thanks for your tip.
I think you will have to pay a lot for the Nikon 9000. With the 4870, it has all the negative carriers to accommodate the various film formats I am shooting. It is good value for money and quite simple to use.
You may like to visit the web-site below for a detailed report of the 4870:
http://www.photo-i.co.uk/Reviews/interactive/Epson%204870/page_1.htm

The digital ICE software that comes along is very good but adds to the scanning time. I usually set the scanner up and let it do it's job while I get a cup of tea.

I believe you will not be disappointed with the 4870 scanner.

Daniel
 
A3 is 11.69" x 16.54". If you want to crop the image in just one dimension to fit the page and whan the output at 300dpi you need 4962 pixels (16.54 in * 300 dots/in). Your 6x6 negative/slide is 2.2" x 2.2" so you need to scan at at least 2255 dpi (4962 dots / 2.2 in). If you are going to crop more, you need to increase your scanning resolution. If you want to print the whole square (11.69"x11.69") substitute 11.69 for 16.54 in the above calculations. For other paper sizes, use their dimensions. If you want a border, decrease the paper size by the appropriate ammount (for a 1/2 in border subtract 1 in from the dimension used in the calculation).

Taras
 
Hi Antony
Thanks for your interesting and informative explanations. I will work it out and try out over the weekend.
Rgds
Daniel
 
Antony, Daniel & Taras,
WOW, That is enormous help.Thanks guys. I for one thinks this Forum is the BEST.
 
I scan Hassy 6x6 color negatives with the Epson 3200, utilizing the Silverfast A6 software. I can scan one or two ways 3200ppi at the actual negative size (output) or 360 ppi actual print size 13x13 (output). It doesn't make one bit of difference in the quality of the final print on my Epson 1280. Ted S
 
Ted,

Some software does the math for you — it chooses the appropriate scanning resolution for the output resolution you are targetting. Not all software does this in a consistant manner, some doesn't even deal with output resolution. So it is a good idea to know how to determine the correct (appropriate may be a better word here) scanning resolution in these cases, if only for a sanity check.

Anthony: there are 8"x10" negatives, so someone cropping to a 6"x7" area would still be well served by your numbers... We just don't see them in Hasselblad or other medium format cameras. 8)

Taras
 
Although I'm not into digital scanning and printing yet, why is it that nobody is offering medium format holders for 'mounted' slides? They only seem to offer holders for 35mm mounted slides. Given that it is impossible to present a slide show of unmounted tranparencies with my projector, all my slides are mounted, regardless of format.
Any advices?
Colin
 
Hi.

I have the 4870 scanner.

It does seem to scan images rather dark, and with a blue tinge.

Anybody know how to nicely correct this?

Photoshop can correct it with auto levels, but it seems to lose a lot of colour depth.

The darkness can be corrected by moving the midpoint to the right.

This seems a bit backwards.

I used to use a cannon 2400dpi scanner and never came across these issues.

Cheers
Jason.
 
I must say this is the nicest scanner I have used to date.

If you get your negs cut in 4's, you scan all 12 6x6 shots in two passes.

Cheers
Jason.
 
Jason,

The answer depends on the software you are using. Usually you want to move the white point. Often times, you need to adjust each color (RGB) individually for better results. The DìMAGE Scan software that came with my Minolta (Minolta-Konica now) Scan Multi Pro shows the scan histogram which I use to modify the white point (or max point for each R, G, & B). I only modify the mid-point if the histogram is top or bottom heavy and only when it is called for in the image (mostly a subjective call on my part). Modifying each color channel separately should improve your color balance (minimize/remove your blue tint). Some software has a "brightness" control which in effect increases the scan "exposure". I use these terms in quotes as they may be called different things or use different methods to achieve the same results. It is also a good idea to set the black point correctly as well. I try to match it to the border of my slides (I shoot mostly slide film in medium format).

Taras
 
> [Does anyone know how the Epson 3200, 4870 compare to the Microtek > artixscan 1800f? I'm looking for a scanner and this one looks pretty > good for my needs( to scan film and prints). I'd sure appreciate > input from anyone with experience on it.

thanks Brad > ]
 
I can't compare these scanners, but I use the Epson 4870, for Hassy & 24x36 negs. If you have questions on it....
happy.gif


http://www.monochromatique.com
 
I read all posts but I have a question.
In what the film scanners like Nikon 8000/9000 are advanced to an Epson 4990 Photo? The remarkablly advanced price is justified?
Thanks
 
> I have a nikon 8000ED and find it extremely good. Both with its own > (Nikon) software or using Vuescan. It does 4000dpi, and 14 bit color > depth. Each channel (RGB) can have its gain individually adjusted, > and it is self calibrating. I also use it for XPan panoramics as well > as 6x6. The $$ for the 8000ED has dropped on the used market since > the 9000ED was released.
 
Robert - does the Nikon 8000ED have a special negative carrier for the Xpan's panoramas?

Rgds - Daniel
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top