Tips on scanning using Epson 3200 "perfection" please

gad-westy

gad-westy

Suspended / Banned
Messages
6,527
Name
Graham
Edit My Images
No
Evening all. I have an Epson 3200 *ahem* perfection scanner. It was freebie given to me by a friend and I understand is a little way behind more recent tech but it's mine and I may as well try to get the best out of it. I'm new to scanning generally and over the last few months have been farting around using this with Image Capture mac software. The results on 35mm negatives have been pretty bad to be honest. The results on 120 film are better but I cannot imagine printing any of them too large and it seems to struggle with shadow detail.

I realise I could spend a little on a better scanner but I suspect there is a little more potential in this one that I'm not extracting. My approach so far has generally been to crank the res up to 6400, and turn all of the image correction stuff off and deal with any corrections in lightroom. Is there a better approach I should be using....?
 
The Epson 3200 should give good results...have you tried Epson's own software?
 
excalibur2 said:
The Epson 3200 should give good results...have you tried Epson's own software?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure its mac compatible but I'll do some digging. I keep hearing about vuescan too but haven't tried it.

One of the things I'm pondering is whether I have the resolution cranked up too high and whether there is a sweet spot at a lower res.
 
I used to have a 3200, and din't meet those problems. From my digging on the date when this scanner came out, I reckon that some of my 35mm scans (made in 2004) must have come from this scanner. I've just checked one, and from the pixel dimensions it must have been made at a 3200 setting. It was certainly made using VueScan. I've put the basic scan (and a jpg I just adjusted from the tiff file) on my OneDrive if you'd like to see it.
 
Standard advice seems to be that anything over 3200dpi on consumer flat-beds is just bulking out the image size for no gain in detail resolved. I scan at 2400 on my v500.

I think there is a version of Epson Scan for Mac, and I would deffo try it.

Can you post an example of one you're not happy with?
 
gad-westy said:
I'm not sure its mac compatible but I'll do some digging. I keep hearing about vuescan too but haven't tried it.

One of the things I'm pondering is whether I have the resolution cranked up too high and whether there is a sweet spot at a lower res.
Click to expand...

Well I used to have a 2480 photo and a guy here uses a 1840 (or whatever the model number is) and they gave\give good results and as yours is in the 3000s range so it would be newer. Don't give up as it could just be a software problem...also if you scan at 3200 dpi it should be good enough for most uses..
 
I use my epson V750 with vuescan. For mono images and slides I output a raw DNG file which gives amazing amounts of adjustment to exposure, contrast and noise reduction. For colour negs I output tiff's as dng's which don't have as much pull as the true raws but they are massively easier to colour balance. Personally I scan at 6400dpi and downsample later as it seems to produce a slightly sharper result.
 
Hi all. Thanks, this is encouraging stuff. Seems there may be room for improvement.

Stephen, if you do get a chance to stick some examples up, that would be great. I'll try to do the same tonight. I only have medium format examples on my flickr and to be honest, I'm pretty happy with those.
 
You'll find the unedited tiff and the adjusted (yesterday!) jpg here. The camera was an Exakta Varex IIB, and the lens the Domiplan 50mm f/2.8, and the photo was dates from 1967. The developer would have been Unitol. I add that information because the photos from this combination aren't as sharp as some of my later photos. Final piece of info - I was never happy with prints larger than 10x8, and even that was the exception; whole plate was the largest "reliable" size for me to print.
 
StephenM said:
You'll find the unedited tiff and the adjusted (yesterday!) jpg here. The camera was an Exakta Varex IIB, and the lens the Domiplan 50mm f/2.8, and the photo was dates from 1967. The developer would have been Unitol. I add that information because the photos from this combination aren't as sharp as some of my later photos. Final piece of info - I was never happy with prints larger than 10x8, and even that was the exception; whole plate was the largest "reliable" size for me to print.
Click to expand...

Thanks Stephen. I seem to be making quite a bit of progress thanks to the inspiration of you, others on the this thread and copious googling.

First thing that seems to be very effective is reducing resolution. 3200 seems a fair bit better than 6400 but I seem to be doing better still at 2400. All down sampled to the same output size. Another thing I hadn't picked up on was that many of the early images that I was scanning were quite badly underexposed due to bad batteries in my old OM1n. It was making detail hard to pull out but some recent stuff looks much better. Similarly, my more recent photos benefit from a bit of experience with exposing for film generally and it seems to show in the scan results. I'll post some examples when I find something worthy :)

Still may give vuescan a try as well. Sounds useful.
 
Last edited:
Vuescan is fairly capable (some would say very capable), but from my perspective is handicapped by its arcane interface - perhaps especially the crude curves control.

A flatbed is likely not the best choice for 35mm &/or dense originals.

Scanning is something of a black art.
 
droj said:
Vuescan is fairly capable (some would say very capable), but from my perspective is handicapped by its arcane interface - perhaps especially the crude curves control.
Click to expand...

You're right, Vuescan's curve control is pretty dire. Most people suggest ignoring it, just make sure the black and white points are set, make a relatively "flat" scan, and do the curves in post. You also have the ability to save raw files that you can load back into Vuescan and make almost any change to... I've not done this but some here swear by it.
 
Not a black art, Auto the first three,then go to levels clip out the left and right to your liking and move middle to your liking, should you wish to colour correct or enhance any B&W then go to exposure and test to your eye and then crop, resize, and finally sharpen.

The process is about your eye and no one else. When you feel happy save AS and post if you wish.

The only caveat to this is ensure your monitor is showing the colour or contrast that you would like others to see,if not calibrate.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top