Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Ok, so the old Hasselblad scanners are breaking down and his big box store scanner isn't good enough. The unanswered question I have is why he doesn't buy a modern professional scanner. Modern pro scanners blow past his 8000 dpi benchmark at less than a quarter the cost of the old Hasselblad.

there are two key points to remember here

1) optical resolution is not the same as DPI (which I think you know, but its worth pointing out for those people chatting at the back of the class)

2) the way they film is placed on the scanner makes a huge difference to the quality.

the hassblad scanner effectively sucks the film down onto some sort of curved plate, which means that the optics can assume that the film is going to be at position x +- 0.05mm. This is critical because the closer the sensor is to the film, the more the placement affects the quality.

This means that in most highend cases, the film holder has a greater bearing on quality than the sensor/optics.

I have the advantage that at work I have access to a medium format digital camera. This means that I can take really good macro pictures of film negatives. but because the film isn't flat, its a challenge to accurately capture the entire frame. I need to get a proper film gate that slightly tensions the film to make it straight. then I need to worry about getting the camera at 90 degrees to the film.

Can you link to one?

For example, the Epson Perfection V850 Pro scanner has an optical resolution of 6400dpi for $1300 while doing the full bed, greatly exceeding the X1's 3200dpi in that mode. If you want to match the film scanning performance, the Plustek OpticFilm 8200i SE film scanner has a resolution of 7200dpi for just $400.

PlusTek and Epson are absolutely nowhere near the quality of discontinued scanners like FlexTight, Nikon CoolScan and Fuji Frontier. Modern scanners claim high DPIs, but the real resolution is far below. What good is scanning at 6400 dpi if the lens only resolves at 3000 dpi. I've scanned multiple tests on an Epson 700 myself, and found that there was no visible difference between scanning at full and half resolution.

See https://www.filmscanner.info/en/FilmscannerTestberichte.html for very detailed tests of scanners, including claimed vs real DPI

I have that scanner you're talking about and a Nikon V ED. The Nikon with 'only' 4000dpi massively out-resolves the V850. It's true resolution is somewhere just over 2000dpi and that's after adjusting the trays height.

Because of that I only use the V850 for 4x5 and 120. It's a waste of time for 35mm even if it's quicker to scan multiple frames.

Never heard of a 8000 dpi benchmark before. I have to look into it.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact