Railfan Technology > Slide to Digital Scanners

Like a lot of us, I have a lot of slides that I would like to convert to digital. A few years ago my wife bought me a cheapie but  the quality was crappy. I'm thinking about jumping back in and buy a good scanner.  Any recommendations on a model that does a good job within the average rail fan's budget, with quality more important than price?

Of course, another option is to send them to some commercial outfit that does this for you. With family shots I probably have several thousands that I would liked converted.  Maybe I should just pay to have someone do it professionally.  Comment on this option, and recommendations for a company to handle this?

I'm sure this has all be discussed several times on TOs but I not having any luck with the Search feature.   

I have been extremely pleased with my Epson V550.  Here's a scan of one of my slides that I posted here just a couple of days ago.  Incidentally, I am not scanning for archive reasons as my slides will outlast me.  I just like doing it for fun, to share on various sites, and I like tweaking some of my marginal quality slides (mainly missed exposures) to bring up their quality.   

---

Just for fun, here's another scan of one of my slides.  Others I know who have the V550 have been just as pleased with the results they are getting.     

---

Agree that the higher numbered Epsons do a fine job. Not much to complain about and since they are a flatbed scanner they do 6x4.5 and 6x6 negatives and slides as well.

A little higher price would be a dedicated 35mm scanner like the Plustek line. There is a stroing following of VueScan software followers in the hobby as well. Some of the newer PC's are not compatible with older scanners, but using VueScan somehow works out.

Dissenting opinion here regarding Epson, or any, flatbeds. Most people who are happy with their scans from their flatbeds don't have any other point of reference. It's fine if you are happy with the results, but opinions from those who haven't used anything but flatbeds are completely subjective and based on little experience, thus fairly useless if you are truly after quality (archival) scans.

This subject has been flogged to death here and, frankly, there hasn't been much as far as any quantum leaps in the technology over the past decade, nor have prices moved around much.

I suggest you look at the following threads, and also some of the links within them. If you read it all you should have a farily informed opinion to use to make a decision.

http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?9,2579316

http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?9,2648278

http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?9,3097054

http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?9,3512961

Cheers!

I've been using the Epson V600 since the first of the year and am quite pleased with the results.  I've rethought the whole archival conundrum and decided that my slide collection is small enough that I will just catalog and retain the originals.  If there's a house fire and the slides are destroyed, that will be the least of my problems.

Here's an example, with minimal clean-up, of what the V600 can produce, taking into consideration that the original slide was shot with an inexpensive camera and lens.

1) GE heaven on the SSW, Pine Bluff, Ark.  

---

Using 'scanner' as a key word and selecting only the Railfan Tech page returns 77 pages of posts.

Using 'Digital scanner' shows one page of discussions about radios with digital capability.

Using 'slide scanner' and 'exact phrase' returns 8 pages of posts.

If you can find fault with my scans, I'd like to hear what you found (seriously - not being a wisenheimer here).  I looked at scans from friends who had Plustek scanners and I'll put the Epson flatbed up again the Plustek any day.  Nikon Coolscan apparently still ranks #1 among most people but how many can afford one of those?     


trainjunkie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Dissenting opinion here regarding Epson, or any,
> flatbeds. Most people who are happy with their
> scans from their flatbeds don't have any other
> point of reference. It's fine if you are happy
> with the results, but opinions from those who
> haven't used anything but flatbeds are completely
> subjective and based on little experience, thus
> fairly useless if you are truly after quality
> (archival) scans.
>
> This subject has been flogged to death here and,
> frankly, there hasn't been much as far as any
> quantum leaps in the technology over the past
> decade, nor have prices moved around much.
>
> I suggest you look at the following threads, and
> also some of the links within them. If you read it
> all you should have a farily informed opinion to
> use to make a decision.
>
> http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?9,2
> 579316
>
> http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?9,2
> 648278
>
> http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?9,3
> 097054
>
> http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?9,3
> 512961
>
> Cheers!

Rathole,

Powerful shots,  The Amtrak shot looks like calender material.

Pat

Rathole Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If you can find fault with my scans, I'd like to
> hear what you found (seriously - not being a
> wisenheimer here).  I looked at scans from
> friends who had Plustek scanners and I'll put the
> Epson flatbed up again the Plustek any day. 
> Nikon Coolscan apparently still ranks #1 among
> most people but how many can afford one of
> those?     

I'm not even going to dignify this with a response if you didn't read all the threads I posted links to. And if, by chance, you did read them, then you wouldn't be asking this question. But if you still want my opinion, post number 8 on page 2 of this thread pretty much sums it up. Remember, the OP of this thread stressed quality over price. 

http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?9,2648278,page=2

It really depends, what you want to do with the scans, if its just post on the internet or viewing on the computer, many flatbed scanners will do a satisfactory job, you probably will have to scale down the scans if you want to post on TO. If you want to make prints or publish your scans, the demands will be much more rigorous, not sure if there are flat bed scans out there that fit the bill. Some Photo labs recommend a minimum of 100 pixels per inch (ppi) and 300 and more for professional pictures to give an idea.

Thomas Eckhardt

If your goal is to post images on the internet, I think the Epson V600 should do just fine.  I have both a Nikon Coolscan 5000ED for my slides and a Epson V600 for 120 negs.  I have run some 35mm slides through the V600 and compared the results with the same slides scanned on the Coolscan.  The Coolscan is definitely better (for the price it ought to be), but once I reduce things down to a size and resolution for posting, you can't really tell the difference.  At least I can't.  If you want to make 11x14 (300 dpi) prints or larger, the differences become VERY apparent.  And for 120 negs and larger stuff the V600 is very good.  And I highly recommend the Vuescan software.

JBWX

The Epson V500 is the one with the fixed focus issue.

The word 'archive' needs some definition. Are we talking Library of Congress or family website? How about storage media for digital files?

Another topic that needs some work is whether an editor will accept your digital image or if they insist on the original negative or transparency.

I've been using the Plustek 7600 for over three years now and I'm very happy with it.  I know they've got several newer models out since I bought mine.  The most important thing about scanning is the software you use.  I recommend VueScan.  It's easy to understand and does a great job.

He also mentioned being within the average railfan's price range which is why I made my suggestion.  And thanks for being so kind!    

trainjunkie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> I'm not even going to dignify this with a response
> if you didn't read all the threads I posted links
> to. And if, by chance, you did read them, then you
> wouldn't be asking this question. But if you still
> want my opinion, post number 8 on page 2 of this
> thread pretty much sums it up. Remember, the OP of
> this thread stressed quality over price. 
>
> http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?9,2
> 648278,page=2

Been using Epson for 10 years.
My current Epson is an Epson Perfection V700 PHOTO.
It is a workhorse.
I have scanned hundreds of thousands of slides in the last 10 years.
Photoshop is a must also.

TAH

---

Rathole Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If you can find fault with my scans, I'd like to
> hear what you found (seriously - not being a
> wisenheimer here).  I looked at scans from
> friends who had Plustek scanners and I'll put the
> Epson flatbed up again the Plustek any day. 
> Nikon Coolscan apparently still ranks #1 among
> most people but how many can afford one of
> those?
     
Unfortunately Nikon's are many years out of production and the ones out there are old. The light sources go bad with age then you get really wierd things like very off color scans or glowing highlights. I've seen four retired for such reasons. There are no parts or repair service available from Nikon. The Plustek 8200i does as well as the Coolscan 4000ED did.
RWJ