12/27/2022 0 Comments Plustek scanner outputsThis is a scanner taking a photo of a fake (i.e. A camera has to get contrast, exposure and colour right because we are shooting a real scene. I have never used a Plustek so I can't speak about it's color,Ĭontrast, exposure accuracy which is something you won't know until I thought about increasing my budget but 15-20mins of life gone each frame - in an 8 hour day, you're doing 8x3= 24 slides - less than a roll of film - nah, there's more to life than that. The show stopper for me is the 15-20 mins per frame. ICE but the scan times result in 15 - 20 minutes per frame. The more expensive 7500i - also reviewed in that site, has £160, 48 bit / pixel (is that equivalent to 16 bit / colour?), 3200 dpi, DR 3.5,ĭid you know it doesn't have ICE - Infrared dust and scratch removal?ĪT these higher res scans, not having this feature is a show stopperįor me. On the subject of scanners, thanks for the pointer w.r.t. I was just thinking that a scannerĪnd a camera are both essentially digitisers - one of a piece of I have never used a Plustek so I can't speak about it's color, contrast, exposure accuracy which is something you won't know until after you've scanned a few. The more expensive 7500i - also reviewed in that site, has ICE but the scan times result in 15 - 20 minutes per frame. Don't have the budget though.ĭid you know it doesn't have ICE - Infrared dust and scratch removal? AT these higher res scans, not having this feature is a show stopper for me. Yes, I would love to get a scanner better than the Plustek. A $100 camera will take a sharper picture than a very expensive scanner. Imperfections in the film, in the scanner optics, in how the film is curved (remember this is macro DOF, very thin) etc. The sensor is magnifying a 24x36mm piece of film compared to a camera sensor that is taking of photo of a landscape. The image often looks limited - the black is not truly black.ĥ. If you up the resolution to get full impact and it takes 5 mins to 10 mins, the task becomes real boring quickly.Ĥ. If the file becomes 6MP, and it takes 15 secs or something like that, that's bearable. If one scan takes 10 mins, that's way too long. Many of my colours are dulled or biased over the past 20 years and each film has a certain colour - you think digital is not accurate, over scanning, film never looks real to me.ģ. Colour reproduction because you are scanning negatives or slides made by dyes is a problem. If the scanner and software can inherently suppress or eliminate that, that's very important.Ģ. Dust removal, scratch removal are a major issue. The Plustek is acceptable but I wish it were better.ġ. With every scanner, that I have owned, entry level cheap ones typical of the technology of that day, I have been dissatisfied. I have had a series of scanners over the years. The only improvement in quality will come with an Imacon but you will sacrifice speed. Just to be sure, the Nikon Coolscan 5000 with the included Nikonscan software is the best scanner in every quality consideration and speed over any desktop scanner today. Having owned a few scanners and having scanned over 11,000 frames of various films, I have to say this is an unusual consideration in the selection of a scanner. In the release notes, it does state, "DNG files work with Adobe Camera Raw and Adobe LightRoom" In the supported scanners section the 7300 is listed as being supported. Scroll to the bottom and you will see reference to RAW scans. SilverFast's web site but it's a little difficult to decipher.) SEPlus and create JPEGs from that? I was rather hoping to "keepĪny information would be gratefully received - I haven't been able toįind this level of details anywhere. Or is the idea that you do all of your processing with SilverFast 6.5 The scanner / software combination and, if so, could it be a RAW However, I've been unable toįind out whether you can get what is effectively a RAW output from I'm thinking of getting one of these and understand that they come I would also assume that if you comfortable with Lightroom that LR will handle both JPEG and TIFF. I have to crank the scanner up to check but I would assume TIFF. You would want to set Lightfast to handle these on-scan parameters to output a fairly good file first. A RAW without these things would be near nightmare or need lots of patience, time, work and photoshop skill. , when you scan, you expect a lot of in-scanner processing as well as in-software processing - dust removal, colour correction for different film types, negation of the orange mask used in negatives, etc.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |