Kevin, There arent many choices at the moment if you want a one size fits all scanner and dont want to spend mucho deneiro to get it. The Epson 3200 scanner is a good as it gets as far as lower price flatbed film scanners are concerned. Dont know what conflicting report you have read or heard but I can tell you this: For 35mm, it will do 9x12 quite nicely and possibly more. For 645, expect A3+ size and from 6x7, 16x20's are within reach. A very reasonable expection from the Epson 3200 is enlargment of about 8 times negatives size. It's not a drum scanner so dont expect the same quality but at the same you would be amazed at the amount of details it can pull from a negative. I do know, an an Epson 3200 user that you can't get 35mm negatives enlarged to A3+ size without the print looking soft. So, for A3+ size and beyond, it's really a mf scanner. Cheers, Andre --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "visart7" <visart7@y...> wrote: > Hi all, > A recently developed respirtory problem has forced me out of the > darkroom and into the digital darkroom. My budget is low, and my > quality needs are high, so I am looking for input on the best > compromise for my scanning needs. I work in B&W and shoot a little > 35mm and 6x6, but the vast majority of my work is 6x45. Just for the > sake of clarifying my needs, I'll give you a little backround. I was > a full time professional portrait photographer for six years. I quit > doing that because I chose to focus all of my creative energy on my > personal/fine art work. I have begun to exhibit it, and am planning > on doing so alot more (hence my need for quality). At this point, > $2K - $3K for a dedicated 120 film scanner is not an option for me. > Niether is the cost of regularly having my work drum scanned. I will > be printing on either an Epson 2200 or a quadtone setup, haven't > decided which yet (that's perhaps a subject for another post). I'm > not into printing huge - most of my stuff is 8x10 or 11x14, but I > would also like to print up to the full 13x19 capability of these > printers and get an excellent result. I understand the difference > between the way a silver print and an inkjet looks, and with that > understanding I need to get a result that is on a par quality-wise > with what I am used to getting in the darkroom. I am by no means a > master printer, but I am picky and I am capable of getting my prints > to look the way I want them to. > So all that said, any suggestions as to scanning solutions? I have > heard much conflicting info regarding the Epson 3200 and it's > predecessor the 2450. Any thoughts as to the capability of the 3200 > to scan 645 for exhibtion quality printing? Perhaps I should clarify > that more. When I speak of quality, sharpness and detail are > certainly important, but the ability of the scanner to capture subtle > tonal information is of paramount importance to me . This is the main > reason I shoot medium format - the superior gradation it offers. I > will be shooting TCN and XP2, and my guess is that these types of > negs should not pose much of a challenge to this scanner's dynamic > range. I think I understand the relationship between bit depth and > tonal gradation (and the 3200 looks good in this regard) but I'm not > sure I fully grasp how the resolution of this scanner (which I have > heard is actually lower than the stated 3200 dpi) would affect tonal > rendition, or if it would scan 645 well enough to produce a sharp, > detailed print in the sizes I will be doing. As far as other options, > I seem to recall someone mentioning a guy who does reasonably priced > scans for people using a Nikon 8000. In the long run, given the > number of negs I'll want to scan, I'm sure outsourcing them at any > price would exceed the cost of the Epson, but if that's what I need > to do to get the results I need, then that's what I'll do. Your input > on these or any other options would be greatly appreciated. > Thanks > Kevin Michael
Message
Re: Help Sought With 120 Scanning Decision
2003-03-10 by sceptre12345
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.