Thanks for the video on the V850 and it's limitations, or more reminding me of how things have moved on ! I really enjoyed listening. I am looking to get a scanner to deal with the masses of negatives and old prints with associated memories currently sitting in my loft ! Currently working for Jessops and using a Canon R5 but feeling the need to revisit pictures taken by me on a Canon T90 and loads of far older bits and pieces. I am under no illusion as to quality but I think you have convinced me this scanner could well be what I need ... along with a lot of time !!!
I've been using the 850 Pro for years for my negative scanning. Got dedicated holders for various sizes. Amazing bit of kit that I've learned how to use to its full potential. Done thousands of negs...every one of them was better than the print I'd looked at for decades.
Perfect timing, Keith. About three hours ago I bought a Canon Pro 300 to print pictures from my past. And I have an Epson 600 scanner. This combo should allow me to spend a Canadian winter in some comfort. --BAK--
Hi Kieth, we bought a dual Kodak Photo CD and Pro Photo CD system for $300,000 in 1993. We set up to supply pro labs with scanning services all around Australia but found that Kodak had only supplied profiles for scanning Kodak films! We had to sort out the profiles for all the other brands of C41 colour negative emulsions by purchasing every available film, shooting a large 3D calibration ‘scene’ with exposure bracketing, pro processing and then laboriously making our own Photo CD scanning look up tables. Like you say there is no ‘standard’ setting for colour negs!!!
That's impressive. Have you ever written up the story? It's the sort of historical note about photography and the first moves to digital that ought not be lost
I have a V750 which is similar except V850 having a led light source as far as I know. It does the job well without breaking the bank. I find 6400 gives nothing more than 3200 dpi upscaled. I've seem some proof of resolution being more like 2400dpi or so. Something to consider for someone shooting larger formats. I shoot mostly 6x9, 6x12 and 4x5 where files at 3200dpi are already hundreds of megabytes or even 1GB or so. With something like 4x5 there is also the question if 1000 megapixel image is enough, for me it is way more than enough. Vuescan is a great software. My old scanner software had no bulk scanning of several frames, Vuescan does. No idea if current epson software is better than it was then. Vuescan has great options like multisampling or scanning at 6400 and downscaling to 3200 which both reduce scanner noise that can be an issue with high density b&w films.
Hi Keith, I know you don’t like Silverfast as much, but I found its negatives profiles work much better then Epson negative conversion and also Vuescan. So in particular for negatives it’s worth a try. You will start with much better colors. Some tweaking is always needed, but more for white balance or brightness and contrast, not much for hue. How the print services deal in the past with orange mask? Every film is different, how would be possible to batch correct before printing? Not every print was great, but more or less they were correct and neutral
Yes, I agree Silverfast has its uses. I just found it rather clunky to use and I'm only testing the version supplied with the scanner [which hasn't been updated since I first tested the V850 several years ago ;-) ] This video is part of my V850 review, rather than a guide to what's 'best' - I simply don't have any film about here less than 20 years old ;-)
'So glad I'm not the only one who finds color negative scanning to be . . . um, a challenge. 😵💫 Your tip to max-out the scanning resolution and saving as TIFF files is spot on. It makes sharpening soft, grainy images much easier. Some of Viewscan's film profiles help achieve a good starting point for editing. But, thanks to the wildly variable color renditions of films -- especially with skin tones-- conversion to black and white images is too frequently the preferred "artistic choice".
Yes, old colour negatives sometimes look like Pointillist artwork (by an inattentive artist!). On the 30-35Mb files I am currently working thru I have fallen into the following approach: - apply P/shop Dust&scratches at 2-3px - apply Gaussian blur at 1-3px. As much as possible before detail at 200% starts suffering. - spot the image - Topaz DenoiseAI “Severe”. Sometimes with full sharpening, sometimes no sharpening with Topaz AI sharpener applied. - spot the image Clearly this is not a rigorous process because each type of emulsion - negative or ‘chrome - throws up a different degree of grain.
With Topaz DeNoise also try “Low light” versus Severe versus Standard. Standard generates artefact more than Low Light. Severe smooths everything, but you may want to add back grain late in your processing of final image.
I have just completed rescans of a lot of 35mm negs and transparencies on a borrowed Imacon drum-scanner. Hard to beat that kit for resolution and colour depth (and really big files!)…..but for all of that what you say about how well the image was captured (lens quality, focussing accuracy, etc) is the governing factor in what you can get out of the digitisation. I tried many of the processing methods to turn the scanned negative into a positive and found that letting the scanner do the translation was as good if not better result. A few clues however on further cleanup and improvement: yes, tedious hand spotting dust and scratches is best; after that I found most often that Topaz DeNoise with “Severe Noise” and NO sharpening gave best balance result. Then either judicious use of Topaz AI Sharpen could be applied, but if faces are a prominent feature of the image then Topaz AI Photo with its face recovery feature was very good albeit it needed to be dialled back a bit to avoid a screen full of Barbie & Ken doll faces! Good luck.
A macro lens with a led panel as light source works quite well and is very quick compared to scanning. If scanning try turning off sharpening in the scanner software, the algorithms tend to be crude and then sharpen in something like Topaz Sharpen AI or Photo with its face recovery. Taking a custom white balance from a section of clear (orange) film gets colours into the ball park. A blower bulb and anti static brush helps with removing dust before scanning.
Ah yes, lots of ways of doing this. The scan sharpening can sometimes help with some film structures, but needs careful setting. I should just note that this particular video is produced as an adjunct to the main V850 review rather than a broader look at scanning old negs ;-)
Thanks, interesting video. I'm scanning old negative color film myself with Epson Scan and struggle with the colors. It’s easy to get OK color, but difficult to get them “right”. I’ll try the selective color adjustment in PS. So far I’ve been using a combination of adjusting before scanning and doing the rest in PS or LR. Sometimes just setting WB works well, sometimes autocolor or autolevels in PS can work well, but mostly it comes down to manual adjustments. Finding one method give really good color (semi)automatic would be great but doesn't seem likely. ICE or not? Agree that sharpness can suffer a tiny bit, but I can only see it at 100%. To me the savings in edit time make it mostly worthwhile to use ICE, but I sometimes scan twice to compare. Emulsion up or down? I’ve tried both, can’t see any difference and use the Epson recommendations.
As usual, very interesting video. I wonder how about using just a camera with a slide copier attached to a good lens? I have copied all my B&W negatives, color negatives as well as the color slides instead of a flat scanner. I suggest to trying camera copying. Thanks for your job Keith.
Thanks - I'd definitely look at a variety of methods for this, but this is part of my V850 review, so hence its use ;-) I still have a perfectly good Canon FS4000 film scanner in a drawer, which I've used in the past (~20 years ago)
I was wondering if you knew how to get the same program you use to scan your negatives? Mine did an update and it’s a lot less detailed than this one. I used to work with this one for years prior
@@KeithCooper with the use of new versions of the USB port, the scanner could scan much faster. Probably, the power supply could also be done via USB3.x in one cable Epson has stopped developing scanners?
A psu over USB would be useless for any computer I have... and lots of other potential scanner users. Look at the true demographics of film use, not the hype. The speed of scanning is not particularly limited by transfer rates - it is a mechanical device - more speed needs an entirely new mechanical design. But scanner sales are not enough that we are lkley to see improved versions any time soon If USB2 is really that big an issue for you then I suspect you will be waiting a long time
@@KeithCooper Well explained and I agree entirely. The amount of time it takes to scan a medium to large format neg at 6400dpi (not interpolated either) is about 4 to 6 mins. It's transferred in about 15 to 20 seconds. USB 3.2 would take about 7 to 15 seconds. On the whole...having a super fast PC to process the images on...like a 5900x, 64gb ram and 3090...will save far more time overall, than a boost to scan speed of the device or transfer rate of USB 3.2 can offer. Coming from someone who has been doing this for a very long time...
USB2 is fine. I have had the previous version of this scanner for YEARS, V750M. Not much difference, except it had a Firewire connection as well. It is supposed to be much faster.but Firewire is a PITA for modern PCs, so I mostly use USB2. No worries.
