Bill_de Loc: US

Good guess considering it's posted above.

--

zoomphoto Loc: Seattle, WA USA

I have been using my Epson 700 for years scanning my 4x5 negatives. It came with a 4x5 mount and does a great job.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

After copying negatives with a macro lens, INVERT the tones (and colors) in Photoshop. REVERSE the CURVES in Lightroom. Other software should be able to accommodate this, if you think about it. I copy slides and negatives with a macro lens all the time. Here's one from a 35mm negative.

I'd encourage the OP to look at the Epson V750 and V850. Used ones come up on eBay every now and then.

(Download)

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

DIRTY HARRY Loc: Hartland, Michigan

My question about photographing negatives on a light box over using a scanner is .. is there a difference in the quality of the download? Is a 120 size negative at 14 mp - 19 mp as good as as one scanned at it's highest level?

petercbrandt Loc: New York City, Manhattan

I have an Epson Perfection 4870, about 5 yrs old. does everything from 35mm to 8.5x11". I've been very satisfied. The only issue with it is, 'banding' on very smooth areas like a blue sky; like shooting an airplane in the sky on a cloudless day. I've only come across that issue once but other wise its great. I will probably upgrade to an V850.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

The scanner does much more that the photo over a light box could ever hope to do.
Go to Epson website and research the V850.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Copying 35mm slides and negatives with macro photography works best for me. But scanning 120 and larger films works best when you need a very large file. The key is that scanners simply work better with less enlargement. (Now, if I had a Hasselblad Flextight X5 scanner ($25,700), I would get much better scans of 35mm with that! But I'm not running a high-end service bureau in the NYC photo district.)

Sub-$2000 Flatbed scanners are not inherently sharp. If you put the negative on the scanner glass, you might get Newton's rings. If you put it in a holder, it's slightly out of focus, requiring extra sharpening in post production.

I am able to retain sharp film grain in my macro photos of 35mm and smaller negatives. If you can see the film grain, the *image* on the film isn't going to get any sharper.

A note about file sizes... At a common lab standard of 240PPI, my 16MP Micro 4/3 un-cropped image will make an excellent 19.2x14.4 inch image. It will make an acceptable 40x30 inch print of most subjects. But if you take a 5x4 and scan it at 2400 dpi (for a 12000x9600 pixel image), that will make a wonderful 50x40 inch print at 240 PPI. It would make an acceptable 100x80 inch print of most subjects.

Take into account the grain structure of 35mm film... Prints much larger than 20x16 are going to be a bit grainy, unless the film was rather slow (ISOs 64 and slower). That said, judicious use of noise reduction while post-processing can eliminate quite a bit of grain without killing detail, when you coordinate noise reduction with sharpening.

A direct answer to your question is that a 120 negative (arbitrarily, 6x4.5 cm format) copied with a macro lens will have less grain than a 35mm negative of the same film emulsion, but I might not see all the available detail. I'm pretty sure a Nikon D850 with a macro lens WOULD gather all the detail, however. It would probably do so with a 4x5.

Now, the Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II or Panasonic Lumix G9, with the 80MP high resolution mode, would be a beast. It would grab all the details of 120 film formats up to 6x9, and probably 4x5 as well.

brettm

Many thanks to those that responded andyes, anything over $ 1000 is too extravagant. I will certainly check for used scanners on Ebay but the stitching suggestion got me interested. I used Image composite editor by Microsoft and got terrific results,. ive included a couple of results.

(Download)


(Download)

DIRTY HARRY Loc: Hartland, Michigan

As I've stated before, I have an Epson Perfection 1200 Photo scanner that has a back-lighted attachment that looks like it will do up to 4 X 5 negative .. although I mostly have 35 mm and 120 negatives. Unfortunately, Epson no longer offers software for this scanner for Windows 10 but I understand that there are other sources. Is it worth my while to invest in this software.. I'm just an 76 year old who has no expectations of being the next A Adams and just likes to play around at minimal cost..

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Try VueScan software. They have drivers for your scanner (1200S and 1200U): https://www.hamrick.com/vuescan/epson.html#scanner-drivers

DIRTY HARRY Loc: Hartland, Michigan

Been cleaning house and actually found the software CDs for my Epson Perfection 1200U photo scanner. Cleaning hous is a major accomplishment but finding the instructions and software ... what a bonus... Anyhow, what are the chance that this older software will successfully load to Windows 10 and will allow me to use this scanner?

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Check around with Windows users and forums to see if there is a 32-bit compatibility mode that will run that software. I know, when we went to Windows 7, my former employer just ran all their old stuff in Compatibility Mode. Some of it was FoxPro database code from the early 1990s.

The other issue you may have is with the interface. If it's SCSI, is there even a SCSI card that will work in a modern Windows PC? You may have to go on a scavenger hunt, and then the issue becomes, "Is there a SCSI card driver in Windows, or available for this old card?"

DIRTY HARRY Loc: Hartland, Michigan

Thanks

DIRTY HARRY Loc: Hartland, Michigan

Years ago, before I got my Epson 1200U I had another photo only Epson scanner and found that with some experimentation, if I left the lid to the scanner up and fiddled around with the light over the scanner , on some negatives, I could get a reasonable scanned results and with a bunch of manipulation sometimes I could come up with a fun image. I also tried putting materials of various reflective properties behind the negative .. smooth foil, crinkled foil, sparkly materials, different colors, etc.. also glass and plastic sheet with various patterns in them (all with the lid down).... I learned to "make-do" as a kid being a child of poverty ... my first enlarger was a Argus slide projector that I taped a tin can lid with a very tiny hole punched it, to cut down the exposure, to the lens .. even then exposure times had to be very short. not much room for burning and dodging. I had a supervisor, who had an extensive darkroom, criticize my work as being very crude.... I had one of those fr film processing kits and my "enlarger" - that was it. I had to mount my negatives in old slide mounts that I could find or bad slides I produced. Ah, the "good old days".