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

About to buy a Nikon CoolScan 8000 - stop me or encourage me!
Old 04-06-2017   #1
moodlover
Registered User
 
moodlover is offline
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 63
About to buy a Nikon CoolScan 8000 - stop me or encourage me!

After a year and a half scanning/training for hundreds of hours with my Epson V800 for medium format film, I've come to the conclusion that I am not happy with the detail and color rendition captured by this flatbed (after all its a low-level flatbed). I've learned just about everything there is to learn using Epson Scan and SilverFast to pull out the best dynamic range without clipping anything, getting the negative flat and sharp, and color correcting in these softwares. Still, I am unhappy with my work when I compare it to how certain labs get this beautiful colors loohttps://carmencitafilmlab.com/esther-and-gabe/k like so.

So I'm on the market looking for a CoolScan 8000 (9000 insanely out of my budget so that's not an option). I've heard the 8000 can rival the quality of pro lab scans but getting the film's color like the lab scans from a Frontier is not easy/possible, is that true?

Lastly, is anyone here happy with their 8000 and can share their experiences/scans (good or bad)? Would a Plustek 120 be better? Truly appreciate it, thanks!
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-06-2017   #2
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
 
Chriscrawfordphoto's Avatar
 
Chriscrawfordphoto is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana
Age: 43
Posts: 8,889
I've used a Nikon LS-8000ED for 16 years now. I would not give it up for anything. The scans give me a quality that makes it possible to make prints that fully equal darkroom prints in sharpness and tonality.

Some advice:

The glass negative carrier is required to get good quality from this scanner. The neg carriers that come with it are completely worthless. They're incapable of holding film flat, and the 8000 and 9000 have virtually NO depth of field in the scans, so the film MUST be 100% perfectly flat. Unfortunately, the glass carriers are impossible to find, and when used ones show up, they go for stupid amounts of money. If the one you are buying does not come with a glass carrier, I would probably not buy the scanner. Its that important.

If you do buy one, you'll need to decide what software to use. If you're a Mac user, then Nikon Scan will not work on Intel Macs, period. You'll either need an old Mac G4 or G5 to hook up to the scanner, or a Windows computer, or you'll need to buy 3rd party software.

Nikon Scan, even on a system it is compatible with, is slow, buggy, crashes often. It sucks. I use Vuescan. Silverfast for this scanner is criminally expensive, I think about $700. Vuescan costs $80 for the Professional Edition, which is the one you want. The standard version is seriously hobbled; the pro edition is worth the money.

Vuescan gives better image quality than Nikon Scan for black and white negatives and color negatives. Nikon Scan gives slightly better color for color transparencies, but not enough better to justify using that horrid software.

I have a Vuescan tutorial for the 8000 on my website. Its for BW negs. I am going to add one soon for color negs and color transparencies, but haven't gotten to it yet.

http://crawfordphotoschool.com/digital/scanning.php
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-06-2017   #3
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
 
Chriscrawfordphoto's Avatar
 
Chriscrawfordphoto is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana
Age: 43
Posts: 8,889
Damn, I just looked on the Vuescan site and it says the Standard Edition no longer allows film scanning at all. You must buy the Pro edition for a film scanner. When I bought Vuescan 16 yrs ago, you could buy either, and just lost some features with the cheap version.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-06-2017   #4
moodlover
Registered User
 
moodlover is offline
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 63
Thanks for the response! Regarding film flatness, I usually keep my film inside a book overnight to flatten them so by the time its ready to scan, it only has a slight curve to it otherwise its quite flat.

Have you seen this:

http://www.dantestella.com/technical/nikonholder.html

Unfortunately the 8000 I am buying only comes with this regular holder and costs $750 (is that a good price)? I saw the glass holder for $800 so I cant go for that.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-06-2017   #5
Ronald M
Registered User
 
Ronald M is offline
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,486
Fairly certain you can no longer service this one. You are one lightbulb away from an $800 paperweight.

There is no way to find how much use it has had. After all it spent its life on a table.

Just make darkroom prints .
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-06-2017   #6
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
 
Chriscrawfordphoto's Avatar
 
Chriscrawfordphoto is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana
Age: 43
Posts: 8,889
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronald M View Post
Fairly certain you can no longer service this one. You are one lightbulb away from an $800 paperweight.

There is no way to find how much use it has had. After all it spent its life on a table.

Just make darkroom prints .

The Nikon 8000 does not use a lightbulb, it uses LEDs that basically last forever.

To Moodlover, please ignore Ronald. He spouts this same kind of idiocy (digital sucks, scanning sucks, inkjet sucks, make darkroom prints) in every thread where someone asks about scanning or digital work. He never contributes anything constructive, just silly snarkiness. Be careful of people who have no website, no images to see, no record of any professional accomplishments.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-07-2017   #7
brbo
Registered User
 
brbo's Avatar
 
brbo is offline
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,427
Quote:
Originally Posted by moodlover View Post
I've heard the 8000 can rival the quality of pro lab scans but getting the film's color like the lab scans from a Frontier is not easy/possible, is that true?
Yes, it's true. It will do nothing to get you nearer to the look and feel of color scans from Frontier/Noritsu scanners...
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 04-07-2017   #8
k__43
Registered Film User
 
k__43's Avatar
 
k__43 is offline
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 947
Love mine, works like a dream.
Excellet results too (just scan in fine mode)
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-07-2017   #9
mani
Registered User
 
mani is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 770
Quote:
Originally Posted by brbo View Post
Yes, it's true. It will do nothing to get you nearer to the look and feel of color scans from Frontier/Noritsu scanners...
Absolutely disagree - the look that the OP refers to in his link from Carmencita Labs is totally possible to attain with the LS8000.

Starting with over-exposing Portra400, and then carefully getting a 48bit linear negative scan, and then converting with ColorPerfect, those colors and detail are totally within reach. It simply comes down to user-expertise - which can come from a good eye combined with experience.

The Coolscans are awesome scanners.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-07-2017   #10
k__43
Registered Film User
 
k__43's Avatar
 
k__43 is offline
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 947
In regards to color.
I find that using this workflow
Vuescan(generic film setting)-->Jpeg24bit-->repairing the minor color errors in low and high and gamma in a curve tool per channel (Aperture, lightroom)
works more than good enough for me. One eye on the picture one eye on the histogram and you are able to get the shot where it needs to be
Even drum scanners don't guarantee for perfect color that part is software.

this is (if I remember correctly) a straight scan with no curve fiddling:
Untitled by Kay K, on Flickr
White might be a bit too blue but I found it good enough as is back then.
(sorry I do not have too much skin in my pics in generell, so those bits must do for skin tone in "normal" light comparison)
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-07-2017   #11
Prest_400
Multiformat
 
Prest_400's Avatar
 
Prest_400 is offline
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Sweden/Spain
Posts: 888
Quote:
Originally Posted by mani View Post
Absolutely disagree - the look that the OP refers to in his link from Carmencita Labs is totally possible to attain with the LS8000.

Starting with over-exposing Portra400, and then carefully getting a 48bit linear negative scan, and then converting with ColorPerfect, those colors and detail are totally within reach. It simply comes down to user-expertise - which can come from a good eye combined with experience.

The Coolscans are awesome scanners.
I was able to sit and scan a few frames on their SP3000, seeing how is the workflow employed.
Took street scenes on Portra 400 basically exposed at box and the scanner's interpretation out of the box was rather nice. But, not airy pastel. Forgot to take a drive to copy them and I don't have those Jpegs.

Most of the look comes through density adjustment and then tweaking in LR. Highlights can be pulled as well as other tweaks. I didn't notice well if the SP3000 is set to scan Jpeg and then the edits are over lossy format, only got to see the size presets.

For one, I am quite conservative and with my own scanning (v550) tend to just set levels and do minor corrections.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-07-2017   #12
jbrianfoto
Registered User
 
jbrianfoto's Avatar
 
jbrianfoto is offline
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Fredericksburg, VA
Posts: 185
I have an CS8000 which was worked over by a friend here in Northern Virginia - he has CLA'd many of this series of scanner (it's a hobby, not his profession). He said there are only a few common problems that come up which are easy to fix; dirty mirror - will cause a scanning error - it is a first surface mirror and must be cleaned very, very carefully, the other is the drive gear can get sheared by improper insertion/removal of the film holder (where the motor shaft drives the work gear, it snaps due to a poor design). This too is easy to fix. He rattled off several other problems he's seen over the years but I forget them now. I bought mine about 18 months ago from his Craigslist ad - cost me $800 and it was his last one. I can contact him and ask if he still does this work and if he minds me sharing his info.

It will work on an Intel based MAC. I have a 2009 iMac running El Capitan and it worked immediately out of the box. I do use the Vuescan software and am very, very happy with the scan quality. I'd like to know from Chris what sort of problems he encountered with his scanner and an Intel Mac - maybe I can help ?

Chris Crawford is right, the glass-less carriers are junk. I wanted to do wet scanning anyway - so I bought a FH869S 120 carrier and removed the insert (it just snaps right out with no damage). Then I bought Scan Sciences wet film scanning kit;

http://scanscience.com

This is a single piece of flat plate glass which perfectly fits into the FS869S, a pack of Mylar (I think it's Mylar) cut to the same size, a rubber squeegie and a few bottles of their scanning fluid. How it works is like this: spray the fluid onto the glass, lay the negative onto the glass, spray fluid onto the negative, lay the Mylar on top of the negative and squeegie out the air bubbles. Place the glass into the carrier and insert into the scanner. When done remove the Mylar and clean with no-lint tissue, remove the negative and wipe off the excess fluid (it evaporates pretty quick and leaves no residue), clean the glass, move onto the next negative. I love the results. NOTE: I do have to fuss around with the carrier positioning settings to find the actual frame I am looking for that is a pain - I have not yet figured out do this part quickly. not a big problem, just a PITA.

I used to own an CS9000 but sold it years ago, before they became as valuable as gold. I see no difference between the two re: scan quality The only noticeable difference is the CS8000 takes longer to scan. I attribute that to an older processor, maybe? If you're interested I would be happy to share scans I've made with both - the images I made with the 9000 were using the glass FS869G (also before they shot up in price) - all of my 8000 scans were wet.

One more tip; I have tested making 2, 4, and more passes on the scanner. In my pixel-peeping I see no big improvement going beyond 2 passes.

I hope this helps you with your decision. I think an CS8000 is a good choice. I make prints on my Epson printer and they look great to my eyes.
__________________
www.BlueGrassHarvest.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-07-2017   #13
brbo
Registered User
 
brbo's Avatar
 
brbo is offline
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,427
Quote:
Originally Posted by mani View Post
Absolutely disagree
Actually...
Quote:
Originally Posted by mani View Post
- the look that the OP refers to in his link from Carmencita Labs is totally possible to attain with the LS8000.

Starting with over-exposing Portra400, and then carefully getting a 48bit linear negative scan, and then converting with ColorPerfect, those colors and detail are totally within reach. It simply comes down to user-expertise - which can come from a good eye combined with experience.

The Coolscans are awesome scanners.
... you absolutely agree with me.

Scanning to linear on CS8000 won't get him any nearer the wanted look than scanning linear on V800.

(I've had CS8000 and more other scanners that I'm willing to admit)
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 04-07-2017   #14
Timmyjoe
Registered User
 
Timmyjoe's Avatar
 
Timmyjoe is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 2,918
Got to agree with everything positive that folks have said about the Coolscan 9000/8000. Bought one of the last new ones available back in 2009, and luckily bought a glass carrier at the same time. A must if you want good quality scans from your 120 film.

I have gotten NikonScan to work with an Intel Mac, but that was with OS 10.6 or so. The latest Mac operating system disabled NikonScan. Still have an old PowerPC Mac that the 9000 is hooked up to. Vuescan beats NikonScan for scanning B&W for sure. I also like the focus point option with Vuescan. I've found I like the results from NikonScan better than Vuescan when it comes to scanning chromes and color negatives. But your mileage may vary.

I have also had to clean the scanner mirror once (last summer after seven years of use). I couldn't believe how dirty it got. And you need to be VERY careful cleaning the mirror.

That's my experience with the Coolscans. Hope that helps.

Best,
-Tim
__________________
http://www.timcarrollphotography.com

New Photo Books
Sturgis Stories
& Scenes From Sturgis
now available
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-07-2017   #15
SaveKodak
Registered User
 
SaveKodak is offline
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: New York City
Posts: 572
You should absolutely buy a CS8K. It's slow, but it's high quality. Plus it's been immune the the absurd prices CS9K's go for.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-07-2017   #16
moodlover
Registered User
 
moodlover is offline
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronald M View Post
Fairly certain you can no longer service this one. You are one lightbulb away from an $800 paperweight.

There is no way to find how much use it has had. After all it spent its life on a table.

Just make darkroom prints .
Fairly certain it uses LEDs. I don't care much use it had, the one I'm buying has been CLA'd and working perfectly. Thats all that matter. Why would I make darkroom prints when I'm interested in scanning for web? You got issues guy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chriscrawfordphoto View Post
The Nikon 8000 does not use a lightbulb, it uses LEDs that basically last forever.

To Moodlover, please ignore Ronald. He spouts this same kind of idiocy (digital sucks, scanning sucks, inkjet sucks, make darkroom prints) in every thread where someone asks about scanning or digital work. He never contributes anything constructive, just silly snarkiness. Be careful of people who have no website, no images to see, no record of any professional accomplishments.
Haha yeah Ive dealt with his type all over the internet, usually old-schooled and simple minded. Let scan lovers scan
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-07-2017   #17
moodlover
Registered User
 
moodlover is offline
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by mani View Post
Absolutely disagree - the look that the OP refers to in his link from Carmencita Labs is totally possible to attain with the LS8000.

Starting with over-exposing Portra400, and then carefully getting a 48bit linear negative scan, and then converting with ColorPerfect, those colors and detail are totally within reach. It simply comes down to user-expertise - which can come from a good eye combined with experience.

The Coolscans are awesome scanners.
I'm not a fan of negative naysayers but facts are facts so if he's right about it not being doable then I cant argue with that. But I am intrigued by you saying otherwise.

Whenever I overexpose Portra 400 for the light and airy look and scan on the Epson v800 to save all highlight/shadow detail, then boost the curve in Photoshop it still looks nothing as beautiful as the Carmencita lab scans.

Can you please elaborate more or show examples if you have any? Ive heard of colorperfect before but when I try to use the trial it gave me garbage results on my Epson V800 scans. I guess I need to buy the full version and try again with the 8000?
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-07-2017   #18
moodlover
Registered User
 
moodlover is offline
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by k__43 View Post
Love mine, works like a dream.
Excellet results too (just scan in fine mode)
Love the work I see in your flickr. You got anything medium format? Or is it all 35mm? What do you feel about handling it, where do you find annoyances/problems? How about the color, are you working hard to get classic filmic color? Let me know, thanks!
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-07-2017   #19
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
 
Phil_F_NM's Avatar
 
Phil_F_NM is offline
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Age: 42
Posts: 3,904
Do it.

Phil Forrest
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-07-2017   #20
moodlover
Registered User
 
moodlover is offline
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by k__43 View Post
In regards to color.
I find that using this workflow
Vuescan(generic film setting)-->Jpeg24bit-->repairing the minor color errors in low and high and gamma in a curve tool per channel (Aperture, lightroom)
works more than good enough for me. One eye on the picture one eye on the histogram and you are able to get the shot where it needs to be
Even drum scanners don't guarantee for perfect color that part is software.

this is (if I remember correctly) a straight scan with no curve fiddling:
Untitled by Kay K, on Flickr
White might be a bit too blue but I found it good enough as is back then.
(sorry I do not have too much skin in my pics in generell, so those bits must do for skin tone in "normal" light comparison)
Looks great on my iMac screen, very neutral color and clean scan. I tried VueScan a couple times and absolutely hated the interface, the terminology was hard to understand and the sliders were insane. I like shadows, highlights, rgb, or cmyk levels style of color correction. Simple and to the point. But your scan looks good, you use ColorPerfect after?
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-07-2017   #21
BLKRCAT
99% Film
 
BLKRCAT's Avatar
 
BLKRCAT is offline
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,775
Everything i've posted around online here has been with the CS 8000. Its a great scanner. Once you get over the noise from it, its wonderful.

I made a video about it here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gNN5cS9Vlf0
__________________
TumblrYoutube
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-07-2017   #22
moodlover
Registered User
 
moodlover is offline
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prest_400 View Post
I was able to sit and scan a few frames on their SP3000, seeing how is the workflow employed.
Took street scenes on Portra 400 basically exposed at box and the scanner's interpretation out of the box was rather nice. But, not airy pastel. Forgot to take a drive to copy them and I don't have those Jpegs.

Most of the look comes through density adjustment and then tweaking in LR. Highlights can be pulled as well as other tweaks. I didn't notice well if the SP3000 is set to scan Jpeg and then the edits are over lossy format, only got to see the size presets.

For one, I am quite conservative and with my own scanning (v550) tend to just set levels and do minor corrections.
Great to hear from someone who's used a Frontier before. Sometimes I need the airy pastel look but boosting curves just doesn't do it, not sure why. I then studied the look deeper and had a gut feeling that some sort of density adjustment and boosting was going on, something different than curves. To get the airy look, is it a big edit made or a big curve applied once all the detail is captured? How do you think one can come close to the colors/feel of the Frontier from an 8000?
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-07-2017   #23
moodlover
Registered User
 
moodlover is offline
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbrianfoto View Post
I have an CS8000 which was worked over by a friend here in Northern Virginia - he has CLA'd many of this series of scanner (it's a hobby, not his profession). He said there are only a few common problems that come up which are easy to fix; dirty mirror - will cause a scanning error - it is a first surface mirror and must be cleaned very, very carefully, the other is the drive gear can get sheared by improper insertion/removal of the film holder (where the motor shaft drives the work gear, it snaps due to a poor design). This too is easy to fix. He rattled off several other problems he's seen over the years but I forget them now. I bought mine about 18 months ago from his Craigslist ad - cost me $800 and it was his last one. I can contact him and ask if he still does this work and if he minds me sharing his info.
Yes please id love to know his contact in case I need to buy parts or get mine serviced. Mine is $750 with a 120 tray but I may need to buy a 35mm tray, though Im not sure yet what the quality of the 8000 is for 35mm.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jbrianfoto View Post
It will work on an Intel based MAC. I have a 2009 iMac running El Capitan and it worked immediately out of the box. I do use the Vuescan software and am very, very happy with the scan quality.
How? I hear Nikon Scan is dead on intel macs. Im running a mac with Mountain Lion, but I think yours worked because you're using VueScan which I think enables the scanner on all platforms/OSes. You have any place I can see your scans?

Quote:
Originally Posted by jbrianfoto View Post
Chris Crawford is right, the glass-less carriers are junk. I wanted to do wet scanning anyway - so I bought a FH869S 120 carrier and removed the insert (it just snaps right out with no damage). Then I bought Scan Sciences wet film scanning kit;

http://scanscience.com

This is a single piece of flat plate glass which perfectly fits into the FS869S, a pack of Mylar (I think it's Mylar) cut to the same size, a rubber squeegie and a few bottles of their scanning fluid. How it works is like this: spray the fluid onto the glass, lay the negative onto the glass, spray fluid onto the negative, lay the Mylar on top of the negative and squeegie out the air bubbles. Place the glass into the carrier and insert into the scanner. When done remove the Mylar and clean with no-lint tissue, remove the negative and wipe off the excess fluid (it evaporates pretty quick and leaves no residue), clean the glass, move onto the next negative. I love the results. NOTE: I do have to fuss around with the carrier positioning settings to find the actual frame I am looking for that is a pain - I have not yet figured out do this part quickly. not a big problem, just a PITA.
Something for me to think about I guess, but glass carriers are too expensive to find. I'll need to come up with another solution like the one you're offering. I only scan one 6x7 negative at a time since I'm very selective so I think wet mounting would be a good option if I can figure it out. How much did this whole wet mount setup cost you? Seems like it runs over $100 easily? The website is tough to understand.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jbrianfoto View Post
I used to own an CS9000 but sold it years ago, before they became as valuable as gold. I see no difference between the two re: scan quality The only noticeable difference is the CS8000 takes longer to scan. I attribute that to an older processor, maybe? If you're interested I would be happy to share scans I've made with both - the images I made with the 9000 were using the glass FS869G (also before they shot up in price) - all of my 8000 scans were wet.
Yes please do show me!!! Its so hard for me to find quality scans online from the 8000 specifically. Flickr shows a bunch of poorly scanned results which isn't very inspiring!


Quote:
Originally Posted by jbrianfoto View Post
One more tip; I have tested making 2, 4, and more passes on the scanner. In my pixel-peeping I see no big improvement going beyond 2 passes.

I hope this helps you with your decision. I think an CS8000 is a good choice. I make prints on my Epson printer and they look great to my eyes.
Is the amount of passes an option in VueScan only? Or would it be on SilverFast as well? Thanks so much for the awesome replies!
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-07-2017   #24
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
 
Phil_F_NM's Avatar
 
Phil_F_NM is offline
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Age: 42
Posts: 3,904
Quote:
Originally Posted by moodlover View Post
Something for me to think about I guess, but glass carriers are too expensive to find. I'll need to come up with another solution like the one you're offering. I only scan one 6x7 negative at a time since I'm very selective so I think wet mounting would be a good option if I can figure it out. How much did this whole wet mount setup cost you? Seems like it runs over $100 easily? The website is tough to understand.
A single sheet of ANR glass from Focal Point is less than $40USD. It will perfectly flatten film when placed in the long strip holder for 120. The FH-869S. using just one sheet this way will give you an extraordinary high resolution without any of the out of focus effects from the film bowing towards the edges. The scanner light isn't punching through 4 glass-air surfaces as well, just 2. I firmly believe scanning directly from the film emulsion this way gives superior results to a sandwich glass holder. Otherwise you're hobbling the LS8000 down to the level of an Epson 4490 as the extra glass turns the excellent negative scanner into a flatbed.

Phil Forrest
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-07-2017   #25
moodlover
Registered User
 
moodlover is offline
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrMcCoy View Post
Since there seem to be a lot of CS 9000/8000 owners in this thread I want to ask: can it scan all the way out to the rebate?

I like to print my work including the natural frame border and I'm trying to find a good scanner that will allow me to do this.
Im wondering the same thing since its easy to do with flatbeds. But I've seen the holders, it looks like the sides clamp down over the rebate edges which is unfortunate, I love to grab the entire frame border but don't think the CoolScan is capable.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-07-2017   #26
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
 
Phil_F_NM's Avatar
 
Phil_F_NM is offline
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Age: 42
Posts: 3,904
Quote:
Originally Posted by moodlover View Post
Im wondering the same thing since its easy to do with flatbeds. But I've seen the holders, it looks like the sides clamp down over the rebate edges which is unfortunate, I love to grab the entire frame border but don't think the CoolScan is capable.
The light and lens will adequately cover the rebate edge but with stock film carriages, you can't get that due to the way the film mounts. It would be easy to modify a holder with a file, razor or dremel to open it up to get the whole film area though. You'd have to use a dual-sheet glass carrier in this case.

Phil Forrest
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-07-2017   #27
moodlover
Registered User
 
moodlover is offline
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil_F_NM View Post
A single sheet of ANR glass from betterscanning is less than $40USD. It will perfectly flatten film when placed in the long strip holder for 120. The FH-869S. using just one sheet this way will give you an extraordinary high resolution without any of the out of focus effects from the film bowing towards the edges. The scanner light isn't punching through 4 glass-air surfaces as well, just 2. I firmly believe scanning directly from the film emulsion this way gives superior results to a sandwich glass holder. Otherwise you're hobbling the LS8000 down to the level of an Epson 4490 as the extra glass turns the excellent negative scanner into a flatbed.

Phil Forrest
Hmm good point, id like to try just the regular ANR glass before getting into wet mounting. I think for my purposes the visual differences should be minimal as long as the negative is flat regardless of dry or wet right? Also, could you please link me to which ANR glass you're talking about? Im surprised you're saying the ANR from BS will fit right into the 869S but I cant find this. Thanks!
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-07-2017   #28
jbrianfoto
Registered User
 
jbrianfoto's Avatar
 
jbrianfoto is offline
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Fredericksburg, VA
Posts: 185
Hi Moodlover,

Didn't have to do anything special - just loaded the vuescan software and connected my scanner wit hte supplied Nikon cable - worked first try.



I don't remember how much the kit cost originally - I actually ordered a spare glass and a bunch more of the scanning fluid. I ended up emailing them for help - yes, the website is confusing



PM me your email address and I'll load a few images into my DropBox account so you can see full sized images. I only scan B/W, so there is no color to look at.



I can only say for the vuescan software, I do not know about SilverFast.
__________________
www.BlueGrassHarvest.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-07-2017   #29
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
 
Phil_F_NM's Avatar
 
Phil_F_NM is offline
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Age: 42
Posts: 3,904
My bad, it's Focal Point that makes the ANR glass kit for the Nikon holder.
http://fpointinc.com/nikon.htm#FH869S

I'll go back and correct my post to say Focal Point, not Better Scanning.

Phil Forrest
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-07-2017   #30
Solinar
Analog Preferred
 
Solinar's Avatar
 
Solinar is offline
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Austin, TX
Age: 65
Posts: 2,491
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaveKodak View Post
You should absolutely buy a CS8K. It's slow, but it's high quality. Plus it's been immune the the absurd prices CS9K's go for.
And mine needed a good cleaning - but it was under $800 and came with the glass negative carrier for medium format.

For my MacBook, OS 10.12 - I use a Thunderbolt to Firewire 800 cable, firewire 800 to 400 cable and Vuescan. - It's slow going if you mulit-scan.

Below is an image from my Mess-Ikonta 524/2, along with a crop of the top image. Notice the on-off switch on the chile roaster.



There's a manufacturers label by the switch

__________________
- Andrew in Austin, Texas -

35mm Gear Bessa R, Leica II, - IIIg, - M2
Just for fun 35mm Gear a Kodak Retina II, Retina IIa, a Rollei 35 S, plus an Oly 35RC and XA
Modern Medium Format Fuji GW 690III
Vintage MF Folders a Voigtländer Bessa II and Perkeo II - a ZI Mess Ikonta 524/2 - plus an Agfa Super Isolette & a Record III
Digital a D300 and a D700 with some primes - still going a decade later

"Who spilled the Dektol on the bathroom carpet?"
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-07-2017   #31
moodlover
Registered User
 
moodlover is offline
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil_F_NM View Post
My bad, it's Focal Point that makes the ANR glass kit for the Nikon holder.
http://fpointinc.com/nikon.htm#FH869S

I'll go back and correct my post to say Focal Point, not Better Scanning.

Phil Forrest
Found it, thanks. They have 2 thicknesses of glass for the FH-869S, 1mm and 3mm, one for the ANR on top and one clear to sandwich on bottom. But I read on the website some people don't use the bottom glass (I don't want to if I can lightly tape the neg to the ANR, I want the lens to directly scan the film if its underneath the tray). So I think ill buy just the 3mm ANR one, yeah?
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-07-2017   #32
jbrianfoto
Registered User
 
jbrianfoto's Avatar
 
jbrianfoto is offline
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Fredericksburg, VA
Posts: 185
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil_F_NM View Post
A single sheet of ANR glass from Focal Point is less than $40USD. It will perfectly flatten film when placed in the long strip holder for 120. The FH-869S. using just one sheet this way will give you an extraordinary high resolution without any of the out of focus effects from the film bowing towards the edges. The scanner light isn't punching through 4 glass-air surfaces as well, just 2. I firmly believe scanning directly from the film emulsion this way gives superior results to a sandwich glass holder. Otherwise you're hobbling the LS8000 down to the level of an Epson 4490 as the extra glass turns the excellent negative scanner into a flatbed.

Phil Forrest
Hi Phil, In this case, with only one slice of glass and the negative, how would you hold the neg down flat? Use some sort of tape maybe?

Thanks,
Jeromie
__________________
www.BlueGrassHarvest.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-07-2017   #33
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
 
Phil_F_NM's Avatar
 
Phil_F_NM is offline
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Age: 42
Posts: 3,904
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbrianfoto View Post
Hi Phil, In this case, with only one slice of glass and the negative, how would you hold the neg down flat? Use some sort of tape maybe?

Thanks,
Jeromie
You could tape it to the ANR glass but gravity should hold film that isn't too curled just fine.

Phil Forrest
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-07-2017   #34
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
 
Phil_F_NM's Avatar
 
Phil_F_NM is offline
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Age: 42
Posts: 3,904
Quote:
Originally Posted by moodlover View Post
Found it, thanks. They have 2 thicknesses of glass for the FH-869S, 1mm and 3mm, one for the ANR on top and one clear to sandwich on bottom. But I read on the website some people don't use the bottom glass (I don't want to if I can lightly tape the neg to the ANR, I want the lens to directly scan the film if its underneath the tray). So I think ill buy just the 3mm ANR one, yeah?
Yup.
There are very good no-residue tapes that can be found at art stores you can use. Just don't use crappy "scotch" tape as it can peel into fragments then you have to scrape the glass to remove it.

Phil Forrest
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-07-2017   #35
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 8,969
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrMcCoy View Post
Since there seem to be a lot of CS 9000/8000 owners in this thread I want to ask: can it scan all the way out to the rebate?

I like to print my work including the natural frame border and I'm trying to find a good scanner that will allow me to do this.
I have a Nikon 9000. (Don't use it enough so I'm going to sell it, but that's another matter. I shoot so little film that it's more sensible for me to use a copy camera technique to 'scan' my exposures.)

If you want to capture the full rebate, you *must* use the ANR glass film carrier because the standard film holder covers a portion of the rebate. As mentioned before, this is the best way to ensure that the negative is absolutely flat and returns the best image, but the ANR glass carriers are quite pricey.

The Nikon 8000/9000 scanners are outstanding machines and very versatile. They produce superb scans of up to 6x12 cm format film (I don't think they can go all the way to 6x17, but I'm not sure), handle two 35mm strips of six at a time, and people have produced other carriers as well. I have one carrier for Minox 8x11 format that allows me to scan 20 exposures in a batch with Vuescan.

G
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-07-2017   #36
brbo
Registered User
 
brbo's Avatar
 
brbo is offline
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,427
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil_F_NM View Post
The light and lens will adequately cover the rebate edge but with stock film carriages, you can't get that due to the way the film mounts. It would be easy to modify a holder with a file, razor or dremel to open it up to get the whole film area though. You'd have to use a dual-sheet glass carrier in this case.

Phil Forrest
If you will be scanning negative film you don't want to do that, believe me.

Coolscans flare like crazy (even when perfectly clean). Any part of unexposed film inside the scanning area will introduce light leak into the image area.
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 04-07-2017   #37
moodlover
Registered User
 
moodlover is offline
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
If you want to capture the full rebate, you *must* use the ANR glass film carrier because the standard film holder covers a portion of the rebate. As mentioned before, this is the best way to ensure that the negative is absolutely flat and returns the best image, but the ANR glass carriers are quite pricey.

The Nikon 8000/9000 scanners are outstanding machines and very versatile. They produce superb scans of up to 6x12 cm format film (I don't think they can go all the way to 6x17, but I'm not sure), handle two 35mm strips of six at a time, and people have produced other carriers as well. I have one carrier for Minox 8x11 format that allows me to scan 20 exposures in a batch with Vuescan.

G
Sucks to hear, I really love scanning the entire rebate. But I digress, I'll deal with it for now or maybe use my flatbed to grab the rebate then join the two together if needed.

Thanks for your input, what kind of film did you scan? Im curious if its good at scanning 35mm I might get into 35mm as well, otherwise ill just stick to 120. Besides resolution, what exactly did you find superb about the 8000 results?
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-07-2017   #38
k__43
Registered Film User
 
k__43's Avatar
 
k__43 is offline
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 947
Quote:
Originally Posted by moodlover View Post
Looks great on my iMac screen, very neutral color and clean scan. I tried VueScan a couple times and absolutely hated the interface, the terminology was hard to understand and the sliders were insane. I like shadows, highlights, rgb, or cmyk levels style of color correction. Simple and to the point. But your scan looks good, you use ColorPerfect after?
No color perfect. As I said straight Vuescan.
Vuescan is great once you wrapped your head around it. You get quite consistent output from any scanner .. I used so far:
Plustek 8200
Canon FS4000
Epson V500
Canon 8800F
and the LS8000 to rule them all.
All with vuescan all with useable colors (as I mentioned sometimes you need to tweak channels in a curves tool a bit)
I tried Colorperfect once - isn't for me.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-07-2017   #39
Penzes
Registered User
 
Penzes is offline
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: The Netherlands
Age: 47
Posts: 478
I have had the Coolscan 9000, which is from scanning result quite comparable with the 8000. The advice, buy a glas carrier is to be considered very valuable. You need it!

It is slow and noisy. But beside that, a quite capable device.


Corvette
by István Pénzes, on Flickr

I used the old Nikon scan program only.

In my stream, you can see a lot of scans made with the 9000.

good technique [goal variation] by István Pénzes, on Flickr

In direct comparison, the 9000 was almost equal to the Imacon 343.
__________________
regards, István

my flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-07-2017   #40
jbrianfoto
Registered User
 
jbrianfoto's Avatar
 
jbrianfoto is offline
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Fredericksburg, VA
Posts: 185
Quote:
Originally Posted by brbo View Post
If you will be scanning negative film you don't want to do that, believe me.

Coolscans flare like crazy (even when perfectly clean). Any part of unexposed film inside the scanning area will introduce light leak into the image area.
That can be taken car of by cutting a mask out of black construction paper and placing it around the negatives edges (leaving the boarders in view). I do that all the time, works like a champ.
__________________
www.BlueGrassHarvest.com
  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 22:26.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, 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.