I want to get a very good, fairly inexpensive scanner for all my slides.
I have looked at the B&H and the Adorama reviews....it seems most of the comments state, that they hate the silverfast software ..and wind up downloading vuescan instead.
There are two versions of software with this scanner...The Plustek OpticFilm 7600i ai for over $400 and the SE for over $200.
Is the ai worth $200 more? Or are main complaints is that the reviewers say to get the scanner and chunk the silverfast software. Then, they download vuescan and have great results. Is this true in your opinion?
Help...I really need to archive my old slides. I will send the best ones off to a pro, but the scanner, itself, has great reviews.
Is this scanner very good? Or is there a better scanner in the $200-$300 range?
Lucy, I'm sure there are many thoughts on this subject, but maybe less as time goes by with regard to film products and in this case the scanning of film products.
I cannot speak for the use of a dedicated scanner, but I do work with a flatbed scanner that I've used for popular film formats in 35mm-6x7cm-4x5inch. I've had very good success in working with Silverfast software with the scanner I use the Microtek i900 unit. Like most scanners it came with dedicated software provided by the Microtek manufacturer called ScanPro, but the i900 was also shipped with a version of Ai Silverfast that was also a dedicated version of software for this particular scanner.
With that said, I'd used the default software off and on for a short period of time but I moved on to using the Silverfast years back now and have found no reason to go back to the manufacture’s ScanPro. However, I've known of others who have gone back to the ScanPro software and prefer it over the Silverfast. There are those that have also migrated to the Vuescan software too with success.
So, I'm not sure there is a simple and easy answer to the RIGHT choice per se. It kind of gets down to what you feel good about using. I will say, I've found that working the image with the chosen software does help narrow the post processing in PS slightly, but not significantly IMO. I guess it could be better worded as the "better the scan, the better the outcome out of PS in the end".
As far as your choice of scanners, I would ask what your plans for the end product are. If it's merely archiving then most any scanner will do that, but if you want to produce fine prints and such from the slides, then you really have to research and verify the quality of the scanner being bought. Many times a quality scanner will provide dynamic range that lesser ones will not. This can be an important item with images having issue with edgy highlights and deep shadows. I’ve also found using scanner software that will perform multi-scans can aid with noise issues if you can handle the delay in the more than one sweep of the scanner during the process. With 35mm it is not normally any issue at all it’s the much larger images that take more time with the multi-sweeps.
Not sure I've been of help, but maybe others who own dedicated 35mm scanners will come along and give better input. Good luck.
I looked at the specs for the scanner. The dynamic range looks good, and the resolution looks good too. Keep in mind that most manufactures hype their specs to a certain extent. So, it would be best if you could try one out before you plunk down your nickels, or at the least poke around on Google to see what others have to say.
I've used both Silverfast AI and VueScan-Pro. Both will do an excellent job, and both support muliple exposure or multipass scanning, which, as Paul said, can be a real boon. Some folks have a hard time with Vuescan's interface; others like it. VueScan is easy to use, and so is Silverfast, once you figure it out a workflow. Getting excellent scans takes careful attention--it's not a push-button operation if you are looking to make the best scans. One thing about reviews--those who have a bone to pick write reviews in order to whine, while the many satisfied users don't have much to say.
One thing I would do, regardless of the scanner or software you use, is to profile the scanner using an IT8 target. Both Silverfast and Vuescan make this easy, assuming you have the target and its associated Q60 file. While it's certainly possible to get good scans without profiling, your results will be much better if you do.
I have used a Plustek - I forget the model number - and like it a lot. I also use the Silverfast SW but use it to get good scans with dust and scratch removal. I do import the scanned files to Photoshop and finish the processing there. I have used the resultant files for photographic shows and printed up to 11 X 14 with good results. I believe that for the price the Plustek units are very good.
Looks like the main difference between the two for the additional $140 is the IT8 targets and ICC profiling capability. This can be very beneficial and recommended as Preston mentions. The extra $$ might only be helpful though depending on your comfort level with color management, profiling (I'm sure there are guides) and also might depend on how many different film types you're scanning. Might be a hassle to profile 5 different films and have to switch between, but if all your film is pretty much the same, Velvia? then less of a hassle. In the end, probably worth the extra money for the capabilities.
Couple of suggestions. Make sure you do quite a bit of testing. What I mean is, change the various settings, auto focus, multi-pass, auto-correct/color, and the dust/scratch removal. Especially the dust removal. This is probably THE biggest pain with scanning 35mm is that slides are notoriously filthy with dust. And the problem with dust removal sw is that the sw doesn't know the difference between a piece of dust and a twig or a weed or texture in bark, rock, etc. Also, you can't target certain areas and the DR sw will do the entire slide. So, you need to test and find a good balance between cleaning the slide from dust, but also retaining nice detail in the texture areas. Also, DR and mutlipass make for VERY slow scans. If you have lots of slides, you'll be doing this for a while. Certainly worth the time as you want to archive and I'm assuming too you want to print some. Working in PS after the scan will be required no matter how good the scanner or scanning sw.
Can't speak to the scanner itself, looks good on paper. ;-)
Discussion
5 repliesI have looked at the B&H and the Adorama reviews....it seems most of the comments state, that they hate the silverfast software ..and wind up downloading vuescan instead.
There are two versions of software with this scanner...The Plustek OpticFilm 7600i ai for over $400 and the SE for over $200.
Is the ai worth $200 more? Or are main complaints is that the reviewers say to get the scanner and chunk the silverfast software. Then, they download vuescan and have great results. Is this true in your opinion?
Help...I really need to archive my old slides. I will send the best ones off to a pro, but the scanner, itself, has great reviews.
Is this scanner very good?
I cannot speak for the use of a dedicated scanner, but I do work with a flatbed scanner that I've used for popular film formats in 35mm-6x7cm-4x5inch. I've had very good success in working with Silverfast software with the scanner I use the Microtek i900 unit. Like most scanners it came with dedicated software provided by the Microtek manufacturer called ScanPro, but the i900 was also shipped with a version of Ai Silverfast that was also a dedicated version of software for this particular scanner.
With that said, I'd used the default software off and on for a short period of time but I moved on to using the Silverfast years back now and have found no reason to go back to the manufacture’s ScanPro. However, I've known of others who have gone back to the ScanPro software and prefer it over the Silverfast. There are those that have also migrated to the Vuescan software too with success.
So, I'm not sure there is a simple and easy answer to the RIGHT choice per se. It kind of gets down to what you feel good about using. I will say, I've found that working the image with the chosen software does help narrow the post processing in PS slightly, but not significantly IMO. I guess it could be better worded as the "better the scan, the better the outcome out of PS in the end".
As far as your choice of scanners, I would ask what your plans for the end product are. If it's merely archiving then most any scanner will do that, but if you want to produce fine prints and such from the slides, then you really have to research and verify the quality of the scanner being bought. Many times a quality scanner will provide dynamic range that lesser ones will not. This can be an important item with images having issue with edgy highlights and deep shadows. I’ve also found using scanner software that will perform multi-scans can aid with noise issues if you can handle the delay in the more than one sweep of the scanner during the process. With 35mm it is not normally any issue at all it’s the much larger images that take more time with the multi-sweeps.
Not sure I've been of help, but maybe others who own dedicated 35mm scanners will come along and give better input. Good luck.
I looked at the specs for the scanner. The dynamic range looks good, and the resolution looks good too. Keep in mind that most manufactures hype their specs to a certain extent. So, it would be best if you could try one out before you plunk down your nickels, or at the least poke around on Google to see what others have to say.
I've used both Silverfast AI and VueScan-Pro. Both will do an excellent job, and both support muliple exposure or multipass scanning, which, as Paul said, can be a real boon. Some folks have a hard time with Vuescan's interface; others like it. VueScan is easy to use, and so is Silverfast, once you figure it out a workflow. Getting excellent scans takes careful attention--it's not a push-button operation if you are looking to make the best scans. One thing about reviews--those who have a bone to pick write reviews in order to whine, while the many satisfied users don't have much to say.
One thing I would do, regardless of the scanner or software you use, is to profile the scanner using an IT8 target. Both Silverfast and Vuescan make this easy, assuming you have the target and its associated Q60 file. While it's certainly possible to get good scans without profiling, your results will be much better if you do.
--P
Looks like the main difference between the two for the additional $140 is the IT8 targets and ICC profiling capability. This can be very beneficial and recommended as Preston mentions. The extra $$ might only be helpful though depending on your comfort level with color management, profiling (I'm sure there are guides) and also might depend on how many different film types you're scanning. Might be a hassle to profile 5 different films and have to switch between, but if all your film is pretty much the same, Velvia? then less of a hassle. In the end, probably worth the extra money for the capabilities.
Couple of suggestions. Make sure you do quite a bit of testing. What I mean is, change the various settings, auto focus, multi-pass, auto-correct/color, and the dust/scratch removal. Especially the dust removal. This is probably THE biggest pain with scanning 35mm is that slides are notoriously filthy with dust. And the problem with dust removal sw is that the sw doesn't know the difference between a piece of dust and a twig or a weed or texture in bark, rock, etc. Also, you can't target certain areas and the DR sw will do the entire slide. So, you need to test and find a good balance between cleaning the slide from dust, but also retaining nice detail in the texture areas. Also, DR and mutlipass make for VERY slow scans. If you have lots of slides, you'll be doing this for a while. Certainly worth the time as you want to archive and I'm assuming too you want to print some. Working in PS after the scan will be required no matter how good the scanner or scanning sw.
Can't speak to the scanner itself, looks good on paper. ;-)
Lon