SSjpg Posted November 16, 2016 Share Posted November 16, 2016 Hello all, I've got a large archive of old 120 roll film negs which I'd like to scan. There's too many to consider paying out for drum scanning individually, so I'd like to buy a scanner and do it in my down time, (probably start over Christmas and January). Has anyone got any advice on which scanner is best for this job? Thanks, Sam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 If you want to do it properly do what I did, buy a second hand Hasselblad Imacon Flextight scanner. There are a couple on ebay for under £2,000, the results are exceptional. Some of my best sellers were scanned from 6x7cm transparencies shot on a Mamiya 7. Then when you're finished sell it on, I even made £500 on the deal, you certainly won't lose any money. Good luck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacecadet Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 If they're going via the archival route bypassing QC, copying on an Illumitran is quite sufficient. Not for the usual QC route, though. I recently copied 5,000 this way. Much quicker than a scanner. Mine cost £30. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlbertSnapper Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 I asked this question quite a while ago now. As others have done, I ended up subbing the scanning out, thereby saving a lot of time to do something else (although there is a financial cost, but that is recouped later on). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert M Estall Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 Being 120 negatives, you will have an extra time consuming task: Digital Ice wont work on dedicated scanners such as the Nikon 8000 or 9000 or the excellent Imacon. So there will be a lot of work with the healing tool. When I was playing catch-up with my 9000, I reckoned 30 scans was a good day's work. That was with a mix of 35mm and 120 transparencies. I did about 6000 scans, it took a couple of years! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacecadet Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 There we have it. 5000 on the Illumitran took a couple of weeks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KevinS Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 I use a Nikon 8000ED. It does have ICE and I believe it works on color positives. I had some done on a Flextight and found the dust spots extremely time consuming to deal with. Incredibly sharp scans, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 I have used an Epson 4990 Photo flatbed. Not really good enough for 35mm but OKish with the larger formats. The 35mm scans I submitted as archival but the 120s went through the normal channels. e.g Boldon Pit I turned off all of the anti dust gimmicks etc and laboriously spotted the images in PS. I felt that the quality was better that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Nacke Posted November 18, 2016 Share Posted November 18, 2016 On 120, I've scanned a few on a flatbed, I know but..... From what I hear the Epson is quite good, 700 or above. If I was starting over I would shoot them with a 30+MP DSLR. I've heard that works for a lot of people. Get yourself some PEC-12 film cleaner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H Mark Weidman Photography Posted November 21, 2016 Share Posted November 21, 2016 I have used an Epson 750 flatbed scanner to digitize both 120mm and 4x5" transparencies. I use the "wet" or oil bath method of mounting the transparencies. This takes more time to set up each transparency but results in a cleaner scan requiring less retouching/spotting. I've never had a digital file from one of these scans rejected by Alamy QC, and have scanned at least 2,000 transparencies. The Epson 750 is not sufficient for producing quality scans of 35mm transparencies. I use a Nikon dedicated film scanner for 35mm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedSnapper Posted November 21, 2016 Share Posted November 21, 2016 Illumitran only works with 35mm Why not just do camera scans? I use D800+ 60mm macro + stand + lightbox Outstandig results and quick http://www.mfphotography.ca/michael-fraser-photography/category/the-definitive-guide-to-scanning-film-with-a-digital-camera km Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacecadet Posted November 21, 2016 Share Posted November 21, 2016 Illumitran only works with 35mm No. 6x6 with a vignetting fix in LR which I probably wouldn't need if I had the original carriers. 6x7 might just work- the OP didn't specify which. The Illumitran setup is fixed- no need to break anything down. It will take a camera and lens rather than the intended bellows and enlarging lens if required. I agree with the DSLR/macro for a small number of originals though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiskerke Posted November 21, 2016 Share Posted November 21, 2016 There was even a 4x5 box available for the illumitran. I've used one. wim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunshine Superman Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 I have a Plustek OpticFilm 120 scanner. Works very well and has some batch scanning capabilities Additionally, the infrared dust and scratch removal feature works great. Regardless, scanning is a mindless endeavor. https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/890953-REG/Plustek_783064365642_Optic_Film_120_Scanner.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Nacke Posted November 24, 2016 Share Posted November 24, 2016 km, Thanks for posting the link, I printed it all and plan to give this a try. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.