Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Rangefinder Forum > Image Processing: Darkroom / Lightroom / Film > Scanners / Scanner Software

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Old 03-16-2017   #41
stompyq
Registered User
 
stompyq is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,405
Salty salty...

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrMcCoy View Post
I guess that "bashing" of the "entire company" must have happened somewhere between me saying 'good results when you can get it' and a description of very good customer service? Shame I missed that when I was typing it out.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-16-2017   #42
jarski
Registered User
 
jarski's Avatar
 
jarski is offline
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,330
nice review. thx

Quote:
So really, don’t scan full rolls. Scan only your best work, show only your best work.
this gave me something to think about. fully agree the showing part, but moving the selection of keepers bit "up stream" from Lightroom to Vuescan.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-16-2017   #43
DrMcCoy
Registered User
 
DrMcCoy is offline
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 370
Quote:
Originally Posted by stompyq View Post
Salty salty...
Yeah, I don't like being insulted and misquoted.

Shocker.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-16-2017   #44
nukecoke
⚛Yashica
 
nukecoke's Avatar
 
nukecoke is offline
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Sweden/China
Posts: 652
I searched on flickr to see more sample images from this scanner. I saw some really beautiful shots on Velvia, but the images from C-41 films are not impressive at all. Colour depth and Dmax wise, the results look like something my old PlusTek can give. That said I also don't know how much editing were within all those images.
__________________
tumblr

flickr

About Film Cameras
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-16-2017   #45
SaveKodak
Registered User
 
SaveKodak is offline
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: New York City
Posts: 520
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrMcCoy View Post
Yeah, that's actually one of the two reasons I went down the path of scanning at home.



https://media.giphy.com/media/TlK63E...04uc/giphy.gif

As I stated previously, I actually called and confirmed with Pacific Imaging that this was abnormal behavior for the scanner. They gave me over-the-phone instruction on usage, and confirmed that it should be able to scan all the way out to the film rebate. Both scanners were slightly different, but they both lost 7-10% of the image in one way or another. They were both from the same lot no so the PI service tech had me ask B&H to send them to the service center - I never followed up because I didn't care.
Idk who told you that at PI but mine crops off the top and bottom, and Brennan's does as well. In fact everything I've read about the scanner indicated that you can't scan full frame. Most scanners can't do this out of the box, same with most film carriers for enlargers, which is why you 'file them out.' I will say my PIXA scans far more than Frontiers & Nortisu's do.

And honestly if the part of the frame that most VF's crop out, most scanners crop out, and most enlargers crop out, is so critical to your work...idk what to tell you. I personally save the full frame prints for the darkroom, that's how you know it's a real print. For the rest I focus on image making, not superficial details that are mostly distractions.

So again, you are being a cranky, low information user. Since you can't bother learning to use it, you should probably just move on from scanning, or possibly photography in general.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-16-2017   #46
SaveKodak
Registered User
 
SaveKodak is offline
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: New York City
Posts: 520
Quote:
Originally Posted by nukecoke View Post
I searched on flickr to see more sample images from this scanner. I saw some really beautiful shots on Velvia, but the images from C-41 films are not impressive at all. Colour depth and Dmax wise, the results look like something my old PlusTek can give. That said I also don't know how much editing were within all those images.
Color neg can be challenging for many users. I now do all my post-scan color work in PS. Often times I mask out the high range and low range indepentantly and use a layer adjustment curve on both. This is mostly software related though. Vuescan and Silverfast could both do a much better job of having built in profiles and curves. Both programs have a select # of profiled films, but every time I've tried to use them they're pretty far off from what I expect. There is simply not enough R&D going into this space. That's why the lab-scanners like Noritsu and Frontiers do so well with color neg, the companies invested a lot of time into getting them done quick.

But my larger point was that it takes work, and that's ok. I remember color correcting RA-4 prints in the darkroom and it took a looooooot longer than it did when working on my scans. And if you were going big, say hello to selectively burning with colored gels to deal with the color balance shift. Yeah, it's challenging to get right, but that's just the nature of the game. Not everything in photography is going to be simple and automated. People have been a little spoiled and they need to adjust their mindset. The more you put into your scan, the more you get out of it.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-16-2017   #47
DrMcCoy
Registered User
 
DrMcCoy is offline
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 370
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaveKodak View Post
Idk who told you that at PI but mine crops off the top and bottom, and Brennan's does as well. In fact everything I've read about the scanner indicated that you can't scan full frame. Most scanners can't do this out of the box, same with most film carriers for enlargers, which is why you 'file them out.' I will say my PIXA scans far more than Frontiers & Nortisu's do.
Well I sure was stupid for taking the word of the manufacturer's service professional over online 'experts'.

Quote:
And honestly if the part of the frame that most VF's crop out, most scanners crop out, and most enlargers crop out, is so critical to your work...idk what to tell you. I personally save the full frame prints for the darkroom, that's how you know it's a real print. For the rest I focus on image making, not superficial details that are mostly distractions.
I want the natural edge because that's how I've always done it. Printing the full frame pushes me to be better in the moment. Is there anything critical there? Of course not. But I prefer it my way.

Quote:
So again, you are being a cranky, low information user. Since you can't bother learning to use it, you should probably just move on from scanning, or possibly photography in general.
I got to post on a blog, and now I know everything - even others' personal experience.

Get outta here, blowhard.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-16-2017   #48
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 4,243
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaveKodak View Post
... There is simply not enough R&D going into this space. That's why the lab-scanners like Noritsu and Frontiers do so well with color neg, the companies invested a lot of time into getting them done quick.
... Not everything in photography is going to be simple and automated. People have been a little spoiled and they need to adjust their mindset. The more you put into your scan, the more you get out of it.
You admit there is not enough R&D done by the makers of these consumer scanners, while Noritsu and Frontier got it right. But then when some of us complain about this, we are spoiled?

Yes, by using Noritsu and Frontier machines! No wonder Pacific Image and the others don't make a decent product. They rely on customers with low expectations.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SaveKodak View Post

Let me know your thoughts!
Really? It hasn't played out that way seeing how anyone who voiced a differing opinion has been treated.

Anyway, nice blog article. Thanks for confirming the quality of the product.
I'm out.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-16-2017   #49
Kamph
Registered User
 
Kamph is offline
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 143
http://gifrific.com/wp-content/uploa...-Community.gif

What happened?
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-16-2017   #50
SaveKodak
Registered User
 
SaveKodak is offline
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: New York City
Posts: 520
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kamph View Post
This is quite typical for an RFF discussion. Some people just see the world a little cockeye'd. Those folks also tend to frequent online forums.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-16-2017   #51
SaveKodak
Registered User
 
SaveKodak is offline
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: New York City
Posts: 520
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
You admit there is not enough R&D done by the makers of these consumer scanners, while Noritsu and Frontier got it right. But then when some of us complain about this, we are spoiled?

Yes, by using Noritsu and Frontier machines! No wonder Pacific Image and the others don't make a decent product. They rely on customers with low expectations.



Really? It hasn't played out that way seeing how anyone who voiced a differing opinion has been treated.

Anyway, nice blog article. Thanks for confirming the quality of the product.
I'm out.
It's quite clear man. It takes a little more work but the PIXA outputs a higher resolution scan, with lower noise. So yes, a lab scanner makes a file with decent color and decent resolution quickly, but the PIXA outputs a higher quality file after do you the requist work. So for making prints up to 10x12, or posting online, you may be well served with lab scans. However if you're making fine art prints with a 13x19 and up printer...well you might ultimately want a better file. The lab scanners aren't even capable of multi-exposure/sample. I see a need for both personally, but were I doing a gallery show, the PIXA would be my choice.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-16-2017   #52
Kamph
Registered User
 
Kamph is offline
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaveKodak View Post
It's quite clear man. It takes a little more work but the PIXA outputs a higher resolution scan, with lower noise. So yes, a lab scanner makes a file with decent color and decent resolution quickly, but the PIXA outputs a higher quality file after do you the requist work. So for making prints up to 10x12, or posting online, you may be well served with lab scans. However if you're making fine art prints with a 13x19 and up printer...well you might ultimately want a better file. The lab scanners aren't even capable of multi-exposure/sample. I see a need for both personally, but were I doing a gallery show, the PIXA would be my choice.
Not too sure about that claim. I've worked with the top model from Noritsu and can tell you that it's a damn impressive scanner. These scanners are serious money, and I would be very, very surprised if a budget film scanner such as the PIXA could deliver a higher quality file. It beats a coolscan 9000. Now, the operator plays a big role as always, but you can't fault the scanners for that.
I operate a drum scanner on a daily basis but was still impressed by the Noritsu.

The PIXA looks like a really good buy for the money though!
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-17-2017   #53
SaveKodak
Registered User
 
SaveKodak is offline
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: New York City
Posts: 520
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kamph View Post
Not too sure about that claim. I've worked with the top model from Noritsu and can tell you that it's a damn impressive scanner. These scanners are serious money, and I would be very, very surprised if a budget film scanner such as the PIXA could deliver a higher quality file. It beats a coolscan 9000. Now, the operator plays a big role as always, but you can't fault the scanners for that.
I operate a drum scanner on a daily basis but was still impressed by the Noritsu.

The PIXA looks like a really good buy for the money though!
Haha well we're at a standoff I would say then. I'm not aware of a Noritsu that out-resolves the Coolscan 9000 at 4000ppi. I think even it's measured optical resolution is 3900 or something like that. From my experience with the Coolscans and other tests I've seen online the Nikon's often come pretty close to Imacons, so much so that for many images an Imacon is not a worthwhile improvement. The Nortisu's are great, they make great files in their class and for workflow they can't be beat. But I'd be shocked if they could beat a well done Coolscan file. As this relates to the PIXA my point is that for it's price, yes it's coming very close to that level of quality. 33mp scans, and I personally think I'm getting great color, other RFF members notwithstanding.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-02-2017   #54
patsesson
Registered User
 
patsesson is offline
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 23
After saving up some money i did get here in Europe the Reflecta RPS 10M scanner, which is the same but under different branding.

The user feedback of this is all over the place, positive and negative.
I just recently started to shoot film in general, 35mm and would like the "best scans" possible in my budget. Got VueScan Pro also, shall see what comes out of this..

Got some C-41 and B&W waiting for scanning and also home developement.

Will have to try out different workflows with VueScan, this one seems interesting also http://benneh.net/tech****/vuescan-c...uide/?goal=yes
Got the PS subscription, not really used it ever, only LR before.

BTW big thank you for the original guest review article!
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-02-2017   #55
teddy
Jose Morales
 
teddy's Avatar
 
teddy is offline
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: South Australia
Age: 37
Posts: 267
My life is busy, two kids, work, house work, photography - it took me two years to get a decent scan from an Epson 3170. Kids made life too difficult so I took my photos to a pro lab. The Fuji Frontier is an amazing scanner, the colour... But this PIXA is also amazing and with patience and a good setup I could probably get this scanner to output 95% of what the Frontier does... Colour in C41 negs is a matter of taste. Black and white even more so - but E6 does not leave any room for correction, but I'm confident a good setup and workflow would be fantastic on this scanner.

I would buy one, it could do a lot of good out of my hobby. It certainly outputs some quality negs.
__________________
View my Flickr space
http://www.flickr.com/photos/joseantoniomorales/
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:49.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.