Film Scanning

Scanning 120 film

Edward Giarusso , Feb 08, 2014; 07:07 p.m.

Years ago I scanned many of my slides to Kodak CD. What a wonderful process. This past week I sent out 40 frames of 120 (30 landscape slides/10 people negatives) I shot years ago and they all suck. The lab did enhanced scanning and the quality for resolution is just OK but they are all flat. The highlights are all blown out to be almost a gray sky for the slides. Researching scanning topics on this site does not address my concerns. Some of the better are 5/6 years old. So my question is where do I go from here. I want to shoot landscapes on my Rollei film camera and scan the good frames. Should I pop the money for a Coolscan or is there a lab that can help me out. Very much appreciate your kind response.

Responses

Karim Ghantous , Feb 08, 2014; 10:09 p.m.

Edward, perhaps you don't need a Coolscan. There are two very good options at this time. One is the Plustek OpticFilm 120:
http://www.filmscanner.info/en/PlustekOpticFilm120.html [Edit: after fully reading the review, I cannot recommend this scanner.]
Another option would be a good flatbed scanner such as the Epson V750 Pro:
http://www.filmscanner.info/en/EpsonPerfectionV750Pro.html
Read this forum post on the V700 for an interesting perspective:
http://photo.net/film-and-processing-forum/00Zdeb
Unfortunately I have not used any of these scanners. Not yet, anyway. :-)

David Henderson , Feb 08, 2014; 10:48 p.m.

Couple of points for the moment.
First, in order to give good advice on what sort of scanning/scanner might be required for your purpose depends on knowing what your purpose is for the scans. For example if you're intending to produce large prints to hang on a wall then you need a different sort of scan than if you're just planning to display your images on a screen-based application such as a website.
Second it is quite usual for scans- even good ones-to require some work in an image editor before they are ready for their intended usage. Some sources work harder than others to match the colour and contrast of the original, but as long as the data is all there its generally not such a big deal if the colours are a little flat. But it is a big deal if they have lost significant data that was in in your originals as you won't be able to put it back. I'd consider it unusual for scans to be both flat and with blown highlights as you infer.
Third there are certainly scanning services that can produce a good scan for whatever purposes you envisage, Whether you should buy a scanner or not is IMO more a function of how many you want to scan rather than being necessary to produce respectable quality.

Alan Klein , Feb 08, 2014; 11:38 p.m.

Edward: I shoot 120 color film and scan at home with an Epson V600 flat bed scanner. The Epson V750 mentioned above or Epson V700 is even better). Most scans come out somewhat flat and do require adjustments in post processing. I'd say my scanner is faily decent for internet posts and prints under 20", maybe less. http://www.flickr.com/photos/alanklein2000/sets/72157625476289859/
I haven't seen my scanner blow the highlights of film if I scan "flat" with no adjustments during the scan where the highlights were not blown on the film. However, I have blown highlights when using the scanner to auto adjust the light levels during the scan. Maybe that's what this particular lab did.
Why don't you post a couple of the photos you had scanned so we can see what they look like.

Leszek Vogt , Feb 09, 2014; 12:56 a.m.

If you're looking for (6x6) "good enough" then V750/700 will deliver. Many of us were disappointed with the Plustek 120/35...to be polite. It was hyped all along...and unable to deliver. Many of us have sizable archives and some would pay even $500 more (I know I would) for better DR and be able to get a crisp scan....in a timely manner.
Essentially, and unless you go to drum quality, the Minolta or Nikon scanners are no longer supported....so any sort of service will be uber expensive or nonexistent.
Frankly, you can do a digi copy with P&S or DSLR for web use or you can have it done by more reliable lab....and get high quality scans done when you wish to enlarge your image/es.
Les

neil poulsen , Feb 09, 2014; 12:58 a.m.

Here are the last couple of paragraphs from the above linked review. Check the last sentence:
"The Plustek OpticFilm 120 does not have many competitors on the film scanner market. The extremely fast film scanners Nikon Super Coolscan 9000ED or Hasselblad Flextight X1/X5 play in a different league both in terms of price and in terms of quality. The Reflecta MF5000 is cheapter and much faster than the Plustek OpticFilm 120 and delivers a similar image quality, however, in a lower resolution. Flatbed scaner like the Epson Perfection V750Pro don't achieve the image quality of the Plustek.
"Since we and lots of our customers had many problems with the Plustek OpticFilm 120, we have taken that scanner out of our assortment."

Anthony Oresteen , Feb 09, 2014; 11:04 a.m.

Humm. Here's a review of the Plustek Opticfilm 120 scanner that gives it high marks:
(link)

E. Short , Feb 09, 2014; 05:57 p.m.

Use a different lab.