needed: Pro slide scanner like Microtek ArtixScan 1800f (discont'd)
 

Hello,
I am looking for advice. I need a professional quality, flatbed/slide scanner for a project to scan ~1,000 35mm slides. (Note: after archiving these images, some will be brought into ProShow and evenutally into Canopus Edius for inclusion in a video DVD)

I am working from an equipment recommendation for the Microtek ArtixScan 1800f (now Discontinued). Specs follow: Welcome to Microtek

The superior feature of the 1800f is that it scans slides without the intervening glass (the glass plate sits above the slide carrier). The 1800f is difficult to find used. In any case, I have had zero success finding a used model.


Does anyone have a lead on an ArtixScan1800f? Alternatively, Could someone please suggest a comparable product that is currently being manufactured?

Thank you.

While it's not a flatbed ---which I have never had much luck with for film scanning --- the newspaper I retired from always bought Nikon film scanners. The current, Super Coolscan has a holder for mounted transparencies, as well as a number of other formats, you might want to look at it, some info here: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search...tialSearch=yes

Hi, Claudia...............
 

Don't have anything as recent as the 1800f, but I do have two, much older 4000t's, which you can still get drivers for (well, they're listed on the Microtek web site, at any rate) and I believe, Silverfast scanning software (you'd need to check with Microtek).

The pain is they require SCSI cards to drive them (very simple one's tho'), and I may have a couple of them lying around somewhere.

To the best of my knowledge both systems are complete and functional, tho' I haven't used them for a very, very long time.

It would be nice to find them a new home if they'd do the job.

Enquire with Microtek and see if they'll support them and have suitable drivers and software for your system.

Regards,


CS

Scitex Eversmart series
 

A heavy duty scanner that should make short work of your project, and still available as a refurb. Downside is Mac only, SCSI interface.
Creo / Scitex Scanners | CTP | Refurbished Scanners

They use pin registered slide holders to gang up to 40 slides per bed on auto pilot. Not the easiest software to use, but great results once you get over the curve.

cont'd: Needed—pro slide scanner like Microtek Artixscan 1800f
 

Thank you for your replies! It took a while to explore the implications of your comments—I will reply inline to your specifics. (I believe that's the better way of following a thread? or...)

Anyway, I do have a general follow-up question, still relating to Microtek. I had heard that the quality of subsequent Artixscan models like the M1 had come down quite a bit from that of the Artiscan 1800f. Is that generally thought to be true?

re Scitex
 

I like the idea of refurbished gear (major cost savings). I didn't call to find out details, however, because you commented on the Mac OS. My studio is PC only—mostly a cost consideration, since I used Macs at school and am familiar with the interface.

Also, with high res scanning I'd want to stick with the higher transfer rate of a USB-2 connection.

Still, thank you for introducing me to genesis-equipment.com

re: SCSI
 

Hey Chris,
Thanks for your reply. I'd venture to say your equipment is still in good shape and has had a history of being well care for (a huge consideration!)

However, I'm thinking that the SCSI connection would make the transfer process slower than I'd like.

Thank you for your suggestion, in any case.

-Claudia

re: Nikon Super Coolscan
 

Hey there!

Thanks for that suggestion. It was very interesting reading the multitude of comments from CoolScan 9000 users.

Comments were uniformly good about the resolution and quality of the scans, in that it has a wide dynamic range that helps bring out details. A couple mentioned a "banding" issue? I'll have to think about the fact that the batch mode allows only 5 slides at a time—which is not a problem if your main goal is quality, but may be an issue if you have a lot of volume to get through. Lot's of things to consider!

Thank you again.

I use a nikon coolscan for slides or negs..the quality out of flatbeds never worked for me. of course since I have been shooting digital since 2003 I havent had much use for the scanner, but it works great.

Er, Claudia...........
 

Rather than re - inventing the wheel here just for the sake of 1,000 slides, wouldn't it be an easier, safer and perhaps cheaper option to find a closish company that could whack them through a high speed scanning system for you?

Gotta be one about somewhere and the industrial jobs can transfer about 30 a second from memory, at any resolution you like.

Might be worth investigating.

Asking the right question in the right forum here on DVinfo would be a good place to start.

Just a thought.


CS

even a Sequoia started as an acorn
 

Hi Chris,

To clarify: I'm the owner of a small digital transfer business (Claudyday.com) and I'm looking to purchase a fixed asset.

I can see, however, that my original post, citing this project, may have led you to your erroneous conclusion about my purpose for visiting this forum.

If I have the correct scanning equipment, I can expand my footprint in Marin, CA. I currently work almost exclusively with the digital transfer of 8mm film and VHS tape.

No worries.

Thanks again,
C

OK, Claudia...................
 

No harm done, but you can see how easy it is to to create a misconception in a readers mind.

Now that we're singing from the same hymn book, if not exactly the same page, how big a footprint can you see the slide/ negative scanning business being in, say, a years time, and what sort of budget have you set aside for this expansion of your business?

I take it (please correct me if I'm wrong) that you have a request to transfer these slides from a prospective client?

The more info we have, the better we can work with you to achieve a workable solution.

There's a lot of very bright, experienced, talented and exceptionally knowledgable people on this site, give 'em the data, they can crunch it.

If two minds are better than one, how about 30,000?

I ain't exactly a slouch either, as it happens.


CS

Flatbed scanners, regardless of resolution, can't get the sharpness and dynamic range of a good film scanner such as the Nikon Coolscan.

So I'd recommend getting a proper film scanner.

Flatbed scans tend to exhibit "bleeding" or "flare" in which highlights will bleed into adjacent darker areas.

My own background: I brought the Honolulu Star-Bulletin (daily newspaper) from film to digital when "digital prepress" was still in the development stages in the early 1990s. So I learned, understood and controlled every detail of the process from photo all the way to press, and then into digital archives.

Along the way I got to see the results of some of the best equipment around, and there was never a flatbed scanner that could come close to matching the quality of a good film scanner.

I will have to put in another nod for the Nikon route. A company I used to work for tested just about every modestly priced scanner available and for slides nothing beat the quality of the Nikon. I think they have about 10 of them running rather continuously along with another 10 of the huge Microtek flatbeds for prints.
Saw you made a comment on the batch scan being limited to 5 and you might want to check that. With the autofeeder, I think it's more like 50.
One note though is the auto feeder can get jammed if your not careful adjusting for the different types of slides.

Nikon
 

Thank you. Your individual and group experience is much appreciated. I value this forum and I tend to "drop in" when I need to research a specific item.

From these and other posts I see that the Nikon devices are well regarded. I do see that a separate loading device is needed to process a batch of slides.

Here's my concern: I have a colleague that has a couple of the Nikon 5000 machines and had to stop using the loader as it would malfunction and mash slides into the side of the scanner instead of the scanning slot. Destroying the original media is a huge risk to my business.

I see material in various stages of decomp <smile> I can either deal with their sensitive media, or turn business away. That's been my experience with 8mm film. Now, slides may come to me in better condition (newer tech) but the transparency can have a multitude of mounts, right?—cardboard of various thicknesses, plastic, etc.—and this from a single client. It's been noted by Robert that jams happen with loaders, if they are not carefully adjusted. Am I likely to get that adjustment correct each time??

I suppose with the Nikon one still has the option of using the 5-slot carrier for riskier slides. However, I can really only afford to spend say US$900—below the asking price for most Nikon scanners. I do have a prospective client (1000 slides), and the potential for one more (with perhaps 700 slides), but the slide-transfer market is limited (!) as folks shift to digital photography. It might be another year before I get another client for 35mm slide transfers. So, my cost/benefit analysis says that I have to reign-in my greed for gadgets.

So, Dean, with a flatbed scanner, just how likely are "bleeds or flares" likely to occur? Is it because of the intervening glass in most flatbed models? Are some flatbed models less prone to this? How about with the Epson Perfection v700? I

Thanks to you all for your thoughts,
CE

Here's my thinking about trying to batch a lot of slides on a flatbed:

High end flatbeds, like the Epson 10000xl, have software that permits such batching--but you still have to analyze each transparency for proper exposure and focus. Lesser flatbeds of my experience do not permit adjustment of focus, and with mounted transparencies, this can vary greatly. And each transparency needs its own individual analysis for exposure and color balance. So you don't gain much just by being able to put a lot of slides on the platen.

My paper had an earlier model of the Epson, and while it's primary purpose was reflective scans, we did use it for large-format film which wouldn't work in a 35mm scanner. I found it cumbersome to use and the density range more limited than a dedicated film scanner.

Since you will presumably have to work on the transparencies one at a time, a used film scanner sounds like a good idea. You can scan with fairly inexpensive flatbeds if you recognize that being limited to 5 slides or so a a time isn't bad, since they need individual attention anyway...I have an Epson Perfection 3170 flatbed which permits slide scans. I have made some but never reached the resolution or detail that the Nikon scanners gave. But it is fair to middling quality at a very reasonable price.

Kodak used to make a scanner that used a strobe for illumination, making it an almost instant scan (albeit one at a time) and my paper had those with good success also, if you found a used one it might be a decent way to speed up the workflow...

scanning for small business: short list of models
 

I was just thinking that I need to perhaps further define my scanning needs as the owner of a small-business.

First, I want quality equipment. I will spend more time to preview a scan and get the color balance correct than most commercial/overseas mass processing enterprises. However, I must balance that with the very real consideration that most clients do not have deep pockets. And, I have to get a quality scan that doesn't take 2 minutes to process.

For instance, take the Microtek M1. It's a current generation machine running along the lines of the Artixscan 1800f: the slide sits on a template that fits below the glass of the flatbed. Less distortion. So far, so good. BUT, apparently the M1 goes through a "recalibration cycle", lasting 90 seconds, after each scan (!!!). For a small business that's too long. And most clients wouldn't want to pay for that kind of time.

So, I'd like to redirect my question. Perhaps I should post it as a new question??

Given the small-business considerations that must balance quality with time-spent, and the need to safeguard the original slide from damage...I'd like to know if anyone has had experience with the scanner that has made my short list:

Epson Perfection V700 or V750

I have read mostly good reviews about the resolution and dynamic range. Don't know how fast it is, though. Don't know if it tends to break down a lot or have other issues that I should be aware of.

Hi, Claudia, again...........
 

Do you have an "all in one" unit like a HP C7180 (mine must be about two or three years old so they will be much upgraded since) or equivalent? (Just in case that's not a US term - fax, copier, printer, coffee etc).

Many of the higher priced units (like mine) have, inbuilt, slide and film scanning facilities.

If you have one, try it out and see if it can deliver what you and the prospective client find acceptable. If you don't, ask around, someone will, no doubt.

Top quality?

Hardly, but there's not much point forking out for a combine harvester when a motor mower will do the job required.

Just a thought.


CS

Claudia... I'm not sure what causes the flare problem but it's inherent with flatbed scanners. Even the very expensive ones. Could be the glass. Could be the way the CCD scanner operates. And flatbed scanners won't be able to extract important details from the denser portions of the image of transparencies.

In any case, the film scanner is the way to go.

And you might want to handle the slides individually. Consider the potential penalty of damaging a photo that someone considers priceless. That's a huge liability that is being relegated to a mindless piece of equipment.

I'm very wary of anything that attempts to handle important material automatically. When I was archiving old photos at the Star-Bulletin the publisher wanted to find a way to auto-feed old prints. But I refused to do it that way as some were brittle and many were curled. And what took the most time was making sure each item was properly catalogued with all the information associated with each photo. That's something only a good librarian could do.

You always want to handle each image carefully to avoid harming the originals in any way. It's easy to scratch an emulsion!

It takes time to do archive irreplaceable material properly. There are no inexpensive shortcuts.