Just realized I neglected to mention one of the nicest features of the Imacons which is 3F scanning - a feature exclusive to the Flextights that allows one to edit the scan as if it were still in the scanner. A sort of "Raw" mode for scans, so if this is well received I'll make a video on some more Imacon stuff sometime and speak about that very useful feature haha! *Edit* Someone has pointed out to me that the CoolScan scans with a Monochrome CCD sensor and thus can't have color noise as I suggested at 12:50 , to err is human and I reckon that may not have been the best way to describe the murkiness in the color I observed. I don't know anything about the CoolScan beyond what Christiaan showed me last night as I filmed this, and only wanted to use a scan from it for the sake of comparison to a benchmark people might be familiar with. Apologies for that misnomer, this video is intended to provide some insights into the X5 and Imacons, there are many lovely videos out there on the CoolScan from people that know all about it so if you want to learn more about them I recommend checking some of those out. - Kyle McDougall has some great ones. I'd also definitely recommend checking out this website; www.filmscanner.info/en/HasselbladFlextightX5.html for very detailed insights and reviews into the scanners as kindly suggested by Nico Cazals!
I would suggest to add under your video the links to "filmscanner . info" website reviews of both scanners as a good resource for those who want to know further about these scanners. It's a pretty good website to know how scanners compare. They even provide their ranking in the Film Scanner Buy section.
@@pablovi77 Think my use of "Imacon" and "Flextight" interchangably might have been confusing, but yes as a 343 owner you can scan 3F on all Imacons :)
Then why you loose our time with your bullshit "comparisons"? You are smart-ass and you want money from RUclips posting bullshit nonsence ? Its too much profanity and amateurism already in the world due to dummy "gurus" like you. Stop publishing, find a daddy and go to wedding trip with him leave professionals to make reviews and share REAL knowledge. Otherwise soon all professional domains will gone forever and everything become a deep amateurism that do not serve of progress of humanity.
When I was in my 20s I produced a calendar that was sold nationwide in the US at bookstores like Barnes & Noble, Waldenbooks and B Dalton. I photographed the calendar using a Nikon N90 (and 8008s) and oversaw the scanning. The scanning company we employed used a drum scanner that costs as much as a home. I say all this to say, you really know what you're talking about and it's refreshing to see someone on RUclips who actually knows this field. As someone said, "a 17 minute video without bullshit? Truly astounding." Couldn't have said it better myself.
Ah thank you so much, so glad to hear that someone with proper experience in the real world use of things saw the merit of this video! So cool that you had a calendar sold nationwide when you were in your 20's too! Must have been a great feeling!
Glad none of it came across as bullshit Limerant, thanks haha! I highly recommend trying out an Imacon, they can bring new life to even the overlooked negs!
Ah thanks so much Brandon, really glad you got something out of it! Hope to provide more insights in the future, and maybe catch you at CFS sometime haha!
The sound when you hit scan on the X5 just brought back a lot of memory's for me. The university I went to had a bank of four X1's in their lab all hooked up to some old school 4,1 Mac Pros (which solved the FireWire issue) and precise colour calibrated screens. I spent literal hours in that darkened room retouching dust - which to be fair was rather annoying in a pinch but, when you finally see your A0 print come out the other side and hung, all that struggle and time spent becomes worth it in my eyes. Great video, man. Enjoyed it thoroughly.
Ah that sounds amazing Rob! My uni had a similar setup which is where my desire to own one was born haha! I actually had to try 4 different computer setups for my 343 before I got it running smoothly on an old Windows XP machine - most stressful 4 months of my life not knowing if I was going to get it working haha! I should print some of these max res files A0, seeing how nicely Imacon scans print really is a transcendent experience! I actually do a lot of work dusting other peoples A0 stuff too so I kind of go into a meditative state when I'm dusting at this point which is nice lol! Really glad to hear that you enjoyed the video, I'll put out some more Imacon stuff at some point for sure!
That's really really good advice actually, I know the university archive here even has a few that they'll let people use if they can be convinced that the work is worth archiving haha!
Maybe I’ll get a chance to make a video there someday! I’m sure they have super rad stuff, I’m also super into archiving in that sense - there was a Stanley Kubrick archive at my uni that got that interest rolling haha! I think the archive facility has been impacted by the recent fire though, I’m actually working on archiving an old school photographers stuff currently as a result of that - at least I think that’s why he switched to having me do it. Hoping they get back up and running though so I can reach out and see what things look like!
It would be super nice to see the process on Flexcolor and then the editing of the scans. I also want to wish you all the best William! I know you're battling cancer and that's something only the people going through and their family know about. I really like all the content you have put out and your photography work. I hope you recover as fast as possible so we get to see all your ideas soon!
Great video - no surprises re Flextight being superior - but out of reach for most non professionals...... Tthe Nikon MF scanners are still way better than flatbed scanner. Subscribed!
Thanks Reimann! Someone suggested in the comments that community colleges might provide access to an Imacon in exchange for doing short courses which could be a reasonable ‘in’ to try out an Imacon and learn something at the same time haha!
Damn, dude! I just acquired a brand new Coolscan V after years of salivating over it and now this! I know the guy in my town, who has Imacon Photo with the Mac G3 to boot, he'd sell it to me, but I can't justify the cost. Since Coolscan V can't take a medium format film, I don't buy MF camera. Knowing how appaling results from my Epson V600 are in 35 mm, I'll be disappointed in scanning medium format as well, so there's that. Incredible 0-bullshit video! A breath of the fresh air on RUclips.
Glad you enjoyed it man! That Coolscan V should be really good for your 35mm stuff though, to be honest most imacons are really bad for anything below 120! My 343 for example I cant use for 35mm because it just takes sooooooo loooooong. The results are good but just far too tedious to get. I reckon your Coolscan will serve you well! Sell prints of the photos you scan with it and turn the print money into an Imacon someday haha! Honored to be a breath of fresh air!
Thank you for posting this. Really nice to see a no-nonsense video comparing the 2. I like the Nikon personally as it made mincemeat of negs that had dust/scratches that would have to be dealt with on the imacon. It's just a lot of post to deal with, especially if you have a lot of negs to deal with.
Thanks for watching! I'm glad you enjoyed! I too am a large fan of the Digital ICE on the Nikon, I spend countless hours retouching dust off imacon scans, and most of my income comes from coloring/dusting other peoples imacon scans so it gets to be quite exhausting haha!
Ah congratulations! I reckon one can get perfect results out of it with time and experience, I was just comparing base scans that would show the benefits of each machine, shall do a more in depth high end comparison in future
Would love to see how it compares to a high end DSLR scan (pixel shift). $25,000 could get you about six top of line mirrorless set ups. Lmao maybe four or five top of the line setups if you add all of Negative Supply's stuff. It is crazy fast though.
That sounds like something that would be fun to try out! And yeah man the price of this thing only really makes sense if the owners specific intent is to scan as much as possible as fast as possible in very nice quality - the actual quality of the scans isn't really even that much better than my 343 though, might have to do a thorough comparison on that at some point too haha! These are also going to become more and more scarce as the years go on as well so I reckon DSLR scanning setups are for sure the way of the future, I'd even bet with enough tinkering one could get the DSLR scans to have the same sort of colors as an Imacon! Probably worth investigating considering the amount of distressing noises my scanner is making these days lolol
Very nice video, the main difference is a CCD (charge coupled device) in this unit, a drum scanner uses a PMT (photo multiplier tube) The dynamic range is massive with a PMT and the oil mount optically eliminates dust and scratches in the base of the film... Odd note, I have had a Rodenstock lens from an analog process camera I used to shoot color seps on, ive used it as a paper weight for ages, it was far too nice to toss out when we trashed the camera... That lens f4-f22 was $20,000 back in the late 70's! Anyway these are nice machines!
I had a chat with a mate about speeds after making this and the 949 is actually 200mbs compared to the x5’s 300mbs - and the x1’s 60mbs. So the 949 should be very very fast too!
Oooh maybe I can convince a lab with a noritsu around here to let me try things out that would be fascinating for sure, especially to maybe compare to a frontier! Could also do a video on my more modestly priced and functional 343, keep an eye out I reckon haha!
Thank you! I’ve never actually done high end DSLR scans myself, I’ve just seen very impressive results from people around! Using medium format digital cameras and stitching together macro frames seems to render very impressive results, very curious to actually try out someone’s setup in the future though
Great Video. After looking at many options I ended up getting my own frontier because I wanted to be in control of my scanning workflow and I love its output.
Thanks Marc! Awesome that you have a frontier! I had a couple of chances to pick one up some years ago but it always came down to space and how bulky the SP-3000 setups are. Someday maybe! The speed of them always amazes me, would love to have one or even a Noritsu
@@willysheepskin It was a bit of a crazy idea, I had to rent a van to pick it up and got 3 friends to help me carry it to the third floor. If you are just doing 35 mm i think the SP500 is also a great alternative. I had a Pakon before that, but to me the Frontier tones are what I love the most. Would not mind a Noritsu either.
@@MarcS4R Haha I love that! Cape Film Supply here is buying all the ones they can find for the sake of maintaining them and having backups - and they have to go through a similarly arduous process transporting them every time from what I have seen haha! I'd definitely pick up an SP500 or Pakon if one showed up locally since the prices tend to be substantially lower than international going rates. Don't think the Noritsus will ever be cheap again at this point though haha!
Most instructive. I read a review from a Scan service in Europe which suggested to have two devices in production, just in case one needs to be send in for maintenance and repairs as you describe. - The difference between the 'out of the machine scans' is shocking.🤦♂
I got an Imacon 343 shortly before Hasselblad bought them. It’s not as fast as the bigger scanners, but makes incredible scans of 35mm and medium format films. Unfortunately it has spoiled me and I fear the day it eventually dies. There is a clarity in the detail of the image that I just haven’t seen from other desktop scanners.
That’s awesome Lars! Glad to hear it’s still working for you, I picked my Hasselblad branded 343 up a few years ago and both of its firewire ports promptly died on me haha! So I run mine via the Scsi port now - which I guess is good to know is an option if the firewire ports fail at least! May our 343’s live on in glorious color and average speed eternally hahaha!
I have one too - with very low usage. I worry more about the parts drying up or something as I have 't used it much the past few years. But it stays in AC and all, never in storage. The seller put it through the service (about $250 back in 2008) just before I bought it, which I think they replace the belt and calibrate it. Have you had any issues with yours at all?
@@vinidajackal Mine has slight creaking noises that pop up when the drum is towards the end of its rotation and could probably use some lubrication, however I'd much rather have it break in some physical manner than a software break to be honest! If the motherboard or sensor or even the scsi port at this point decided to stop working there would be nothing I could do. The belts, lubrication and other physical parts I can at least see myself managing to somehow replace or have machined - although i'd much rather just have it run forever haha!
Super informative! As someone who uses my partner’s D850 to scan my negatives because I’m broke I can only dream about getting a dedicated scanner lol. I never would’ve thought to push Ektar 100 two stops though 😂 that gave me a good chuckle.
Woah Tim you've just blown my mind, I had no idea that cruise ships would have photo labs on them! It makes sense though I guess, no time to drop off holiday snaps during stops so just do it on the boat haha! That's so cool! Glad you enjoyed the video too!
Excellent video! I own the Flextight 343 now since about 15 years ago - you forgot to mention a huge quality spec is the true colorbit depth is 16 bits per color for 48 bits total - same as the 9000 true however the noise is extremely low unlike the 9000 as you demonstrated. Do this test: scan a black medium format slide, then look at the RGB values from pixel to pixel - amazing that the noise only flips occasionally at the least significant digit - truly remarkable.
I'm glad you enjoyed it Vincent! Rad to have another fellow 343 owner stop by haha, I should've mentioned the color depth indeed! I'll try shoot a blank slide and scan it sometime, it sounds like a fascinating and satisfying exercise!
Loved watching this comparison. There’s a guy local to me selling a 646 and it sparked my interest. I’d love to see a comparison with high end mirrorless scanning setups. I’ve seen some people using the Fuji GFX line for scans and I’d like to see how it compares to a flextight.
Thanks Chandler! The 646 is a really solid machine, I believe some people even prefer them to newer ones because they added the diffused light source situation after the 646 and some reckon it's actually sharper than later models because of it! I'm super keen on trying out a GFX scanning setup, I've seen some examples online as well and they look really impressive!
Thanks Andrew! So awesome that you have an X1! It’s actually strange I’ve been comparing these scans to the scans I get from my 343 now and the way the x5 renders color is actually quite different in a nice way, the color blend is somehow even softer and cleaner on the newer ones it seems than on mine! I reckon it might have something to do with the diffused light source situation they implemented after the 646, shall have to investigate some more haha! I hope your X1 brings you many more happy years of scans!
@@willysheepskin Yeah I think that's for sure from the diffused light source. I used to rent time on an X5 and then found a good deal locally on an X1 and went for it. There is for sure a difference between the X5 and X1 (X1 also has no diffuser. Only the 949 and X5 had that.) Ive found if you really lower the sharpening in flex color (-120) you can get that softer look somewhat. Love the videos! Keep up the great work
Hi William. I enjoyed your video very much, especially the comparison of the Hasselblad X5 and the Nikon Coolscan. It didn't leave any doubt about which is the better scanner, especially with your compelling assessments of the images on screen. Please skip all the way down to the numbered questions at the bottom of the page, if you don't want to take the time to read the long, probably somewhat boring chronology below. I wouldn't blame you, for sure. I don't know if you are still responding to comments on this oldish video, but I hope you are, and that you might answer a few questions for me. I bought an Imacon Flextight 646 sometime in the early 2000's. I am an old school commercial/advertising photographer, operating my own business for over 40 years. As the onset of digital photography became inevitable, or at least the need for pros like me to give clients digital files of one sort or another, I had to find my way from a completely analog workflow, to being fully digital. I was very skeptical of the not-very-sharp digital cameras of those days, and the puny files they generated. The only other option was to buy a very good scanner to convert my large and medium format film images to digital images. I knew absolutely nothing about Photoshop, or much of anything about computers, but jumped into the deep end of the pool, because I didn't have a choice. I already had a relationship with a young guy, who worked in a very high end lab, initially scanning my film. He was probably doing much the same kind of work you do. I heard similarities in the way you speak and the way he spoke about the integrity of excellent quality scans. I hired this fellow to come on the weekends to teach me everything there is to know about how to think about digital imagery and all the underpinnings of digital files. At any rate, I bought the 646 because I had to do it if I was going to stay in business. My young friend was skeptical about the Flextight 646 in the same way I was about crappy digital cameras. His workflow was entirely with very high end drum scanners, costing in the tens of thousands of dollars, and he was a bit snotty about anything he deemed to be short of that technology. But I knew the files out of the 646 were more than adequate for my client's purposes, however much less pristine they may have been than those out of Heidelberg machines. Anyway, I learned everything I now know from this young fellow, and went on to confidently scan with my Imacon scanner and become very proficient in everything to do with digital images.But THEN the digital cameras got better, and the time it took to scan all the individual images my clients needed kept expanding. So, I bought digital cameras and put the Imacon in moth balls. Fast forward to today, when I hardly ever use the Imacon anymore. I am getting rid of all my old, unused equipment, now that I've retired, and am entertaining the thought of selling the 646. It is in perfect shape, and probably made far fewer scans than the average 646 may have done. I have several questions for you: 1. What is a perfectly operating Imacon 646 worth these days? 2. If the scanner is worth selling, what kind of person/photographer would want such a thing? How would I best find possible buyers? 3. When turning the machine on, a dialog box comes up, indicating X number of hours have passed, and that it is time to send the scanner in for service. I believe the warning is generated by the passage of time, rather than the number of scans that have been made. I DID send it in for service, shortly before I stopped using it altogether. The number of scans made since that time is miniscule. Is there a way to re-set the timer, so that no warning will be shown? Thanks for the great video, and also for your answers to my questions, if you ever do happen to see this entry. Todd Pearson www.toddpearsonphotography.com/
Great comparison. I use Vuescan with my Coolscan, and scan as a positive raw. I then invert with a separate program. I never get any blown highlights or oversharpened feel with my 120 negatives, so I wonder if what you're seeing is mostly due to software and not hardware. Anyhow, keep up the great work!
Glad you enjoyed it Giuseppe! I reckon when the time comes to give both scanners the best chance to shine I'll do things that way, I think with the Nikon its downsides were mostly a failing of the default software and the way it was set up! When I try and compare them for the best results from each I hope to see more latitude from the Nikon for sure! And thanks I shall endeavor to keep it up!
I know that digital ice makes things easier and I guess you wanted to show that. Comparing a scan with the ICE feature seems silly the digital ICE is always going to compress the contrast which is going to mean losing detail in the scan. I believe the manual for the cool scan expressly mentions this. I would rather see two scans compared totally "dry" out of the scanner. I have worked with Nikon cool scans for a long time and have had images scanned on the Ikon/Hasselblad. The Hasselblad is an awesome scanner.
I'll do that for sure when I do a proper full comparison of the results from these scanners rather than just comparing max res files with the base software! I did consider doing the scan without ICE on this day, but it didn't make sense since the main benefit of the CoolScan to me was the idea of ICE and running it without it wouldn't have illustrated that. Two totally dry images shall be compared soon though! - and a variety of other combos as well haha!
Good video. On. Your 99.7 % Color monitor, should get shields for the sides and top. Another one is in my scanning room get day Color leds. I think it’s 5000 kelvin. In future save and buy a Heidelberg d7100 scanner. Your doing a good job. Also walls should be painted white to. Match the outdoor lighting.
Thanks Mario! I do have light shields for the Eizo I use for proper color work thankfully, I reckon the daylight Leds would work a treat though, and I might repaint my grey wall white as I reckon that could help too! Thanks for the tips and kind words, I'd looove to own a Heidelberg someday!
I am very late to the game, but I have access to an Imacon 848 for scanning, and all I will say is, it is amazing. I had wanted to get a Coolscan 9000, but after scanning with an 848, I can't justify the purchase. I think the part I love most is that it focuses right down to the grain, and the colors are stunning. For the most part, an A0 Imacon scan is overkill, but I also have access to an A0 printer, so I plan to give it a shot.
Really glad to hear you found it interesting! I reckon some dreaming and some trawling of the secondhand marketplaces might net you an Imacon eventually haha! I saw a precision i go for £1500 last week, which is still a bunch of money for sure but at least substantially less than the X5 to get access to some glorious Imacon colors haha!
I just found your video and I am very impressed with your knowledge. I am of course not as knowledgeable as you about scanning and would love to get some information and/or opinion regarding a scanner for the amateur. If you would please advise I would appreciate and value your input.
Thanks Diane! Glad to come across that way! With regards to scanners for beginners, I personally just tinkered with DLSR scanning (using a digital camera to photograph negatives and then inverting them) and lab scans done on a Noritsu HS-1800 until I had saved up enough to afford my Imacon! I believe in terms of accessibility and relative simplicity flatbed scanners like the Epson V800 and other Epsons in that line are very simple to use, but the results can be somewhat lacking. I moved away from them very quickly when I was starting out. There are some really good videos on youtube about DSLR scanning and the inversion of those negatives though, and I would recommend that as the best way to get into digitizing negatives in a cost effective manner (if you already have a DSLR). Please feel free to message me on instagram if you have any further questions, @willysheepskin!
Wow, $25000 now! When I bought my Nikon Coolscan 9000 several years ago, I did look at the Flextight and it was around $10000 if I recall correctly, whereas the Coolscan was maybe half that, so I went with the Nikon. Had price not been a consideration I would almost certainly have bought the Flextight, as I do shoot some 4x5. I use Vuescan software and I’ve been very happy with the results printing up to 50x40cm. Recently I’m shooting more and more b&w and printing in the darkroom, so scanning is becoming less important to me.
Yeah its quite mental, all of the Imacon’s have gotten more expensive over the last couple of years , I think as they simultaneously become more scarce and well known the prices are increasing too! I’ve actually seen a couple of listings for higher prices than 25 which seems obscene given the amount of effort they can take to set up at times - there’s actually an 848 listed somewhere for 15,000 euros at the moment to give an idea of the inflation! I think I might have come across as more derogatory towards the coolscan than I intended in this video, but am very glad to hear that you’ve been able to achieve results you enjoy with yours! It is a truly great scanner, the flextights just have something to them that I haven’t seen replicated in other scans as of yet! I’ve also been getting more and more into the darkroom lately, I’m actually curious to try see what happens if I try scan some prints as reflective documents on the x5, would just have to try source a holder!
Okay so I’ve always wondered why 35mm flex tight scans have a higher dpi than medium format flex tight scans. If you print your work very often I’d love to see a video on your process. Great video.
I'll for sure be putting together a print video in the not too distant future! Just lining things up and when it's all ready I'll get into the print stuff haha! Glad you learnt something!
My company is running a Creo iQsmart 3 and the Same sp-3000s that you have shown in your video. When purchasing the Creo, the Flextight x5 was a consideration and still could be in the future. In the end we opted for the Creo due to the price but also the workflow. Curious of your thoughts comparing the two. Also, we are being joined with a new partner soon who will bring with him a Phase One Cultural Heritage system. I'd also like your thoughts on that. We struggle with the color inversions with the POCH system.
That's awesome Greg! I don't have any experience with the Creo but from what I've read online it sounds like a great flextight alternative! The Phase One system also looks amazing but I haven't been near one either haha! With regards to color inversion though, there's a really good tutorial here on RUclips by a fella called Alex Burke where he shows his inversion process and explains how one can turn the steps into photoshop actions. It works really well, in the end it comes down to the eyes of the person doing the inversion but the process is definitely a solid way to go about it!
@@willysheepskin Thanks for the response William. I watched the Alex Burke video. It's basically a technique I worked with some time ago when trying to make this work with a DSLR capture of a color negative in PS. Yes, it does get it into the ballpark but it's not exactly simple and having to do things like change the colors of the sky to look like sky blue is a bit much for any kind of higher volume workflow. Still...his results has the same salmon color to some of the mid tone values that we're getting with the POPH system. I worked on one of the inversions P1 sent me and in the ACR, using the color mixer, I quickly got their inversion to the point I was pretty happy with it. Then I sent it to a colleague and he said "that looks pretty good but what's with the salmon color scattered in the mid tones". One of those things, once you see it you can't unsee it. Yes...like you say "it comes down to the eyes of the person doing the inversion" ....but that said the inversions my Creo does isn't the same...it just simply works. I suspect your X5 is the same. Even our Espon V-750s do an okay job of it in general...as do as you're likely aware the Fuji SP-3000s. Oh...and by the way, I really enjoyed your video. My own company needs to be producing some stuff like this.
William, great video and to the point. Much appreciated! I'd be very interested to see a section of a 20x30 / 50 x 75 cm print from the Hasselblad and the Nikon scanners, viewed from about 3 - 4 ft / 1.0 - 1.3m. Prints are "what it's all about for me" Also have you posted reviews of the other Imacon/Hasselblad scanners? How do they compare as they went through upgrades. Some of us still like dedicated scanners !
Keep an eye out locally to you! They sometimes pop up for very low prices because people don't know what they are - the precision line of scanners especially seem to show up in the strangest places for low prices haha!
Thanks for the tip! I shall do so next time, I figured this time it would be most fair to compare both scanners with their default software but will try to get the most out of the coolscan next time for a more detailed high end comparison! That was the first time I scanned anything with the coolscan and just wanted to see how things would match up by default out of curiosity!
My Imacon 848 will scan 5”x7” film. I presume the X5 is the same. 5”x7” film holders are available on the internet. I scan a strip of 120 film, or 35mm in one pass at a higher rate and use Photoshop to separate the image after adjusting the group by levelling, cropping the borders and global adjustments, before cropping the individual images. I also scan 6x17” film which cannot be done with the Nikon. Thanks for your review.
Ah yes I should’ve pointed out the specifics of it and how one can scan in very long strips - the holder I’m using in this video can actually do 6x17 haha! I’m jealous of your 848, maybe someday I’ll trade my 343 for one of them or a 949! Thanks for watching!
Overall a good comparison but I feel you can get an even better result from the Nikon 9000 with the ideas below. Also, if the mirror is dusty on the 9000 it can adversely affect IQ, and if it's never been serviced that's very likely the case.
Thanks John! I reckon one can definitely get more out of the coolscan, but as I said in the video in this instance I was just trying to compare the default software and see how it compared between scanners. I shall definitely make a video in future where I take into account all the useful tips provided here for the coolscan and give it the best chance to shine!
My university had a flextight. I could zoom in on that 35mm neg to an ASTOUNDING degree. For home though, I’d love a Nikon. I see that the pacific xa series is graining popularity however compared to the Nikon it appears that the Nikon has better color rendition. Not that you couldn’t edit the photo but yknow.
I'd be curious to see the results if you just scanned both as positives and then converted it using Negative Lab Pro or something. Because a lot of the difference between the Hassi and Nikon came down to the difference in the rendering of colors/shadows, which is hard to pin down to the scanner vs the scanner software. Great video regardless!
Cheers Benjamin! I wanted to try out just the base scanner software for both scanners in this video to give an idea of how that looks, but if I revisit this comparison again I definitely reckon scanning as a positive and inverting manually or with nlp will be the strategy!
@@willysheepskin Ya, would be awesome to see that comparison! Since your quite experienced with scanning it seems, I'm curious what your thoughts are on this: How do you think the CoolScan compares to a top end DSLR setup? I have the negative supply rig, with a Canon R5 and 100mm macro lens that I've been using, and the results are amazing, but the coolscan has some appealing features, mainly the ICE, so I'm curious what your thoughts are in regards to the quality of result between the two setups.
Scanning negative material on a Nikon 9000 definitely has more dynamic range if done as a positive. You can invert the curves in the scan software and view the neg as a positive, or invert it later in PS. Otherwise, I think some of your comparisons are swayed by vast contrast differences which should have been normalized for a meaningful comparison. The Nikon definitely has more than enough dynamic range for neg material, it is only transparencies that may be helped by the Imacon dynamic range. I find the Nikon can "bloom" around transparencies highlights. Reliability can not be overlooked, my 9000ED has functioned for almost 20 years straight now.
Thanks Justin, really glad you enjoyed it! I do seem to have said something ill informed about color noise with regards to the CoolScan, but like I say at the end of the day it's up to personal choice and the Imacon would be my choice to work with at least haha!
@@willysheepskin I’ve only ever used/use a flatbed because that’s my budget, but everything pretty much about that video was new info to me. I appreciate it! Thanks again 😊
Thanks for the very interesting presentations, even though I will stay with my low end gear :-) but in the meantime, after 4 years of experience my workflow with camera scanning (Sony a7) combined with the negativelabpro software leads to pretty good results
Glad you enjoyed it Etienne! Experience with tools trumps fancier gear I reckon, and if you move up into fancier equipment I reckon the lessons you've learnt with what you had on hand will pay off immensely anyway!
lovely and tremendously instructive. I have ‘some’ access to a Flextight, and as I am moving from medium format to 4x5 I am very interested in the potential. I am also moving into slide film, as the image quality I have got so far is really below (with an Epson) what I get with digital MF. As I integrate 4x5 in my workflow, ensuring quality along the process is key. Thank you.
Thanks Irene! Glad you found it informative! 4x5 Flextight scans are glorious, I so look forward to scanning 4x5 stuff when I get into that side of things someday, but the results that I have seen from friends and peers are sublime! The biggest benefit with a scanner designed for film is the way the colors are interpreted, Digital MF scans can be just as sharp and high quality, but in terms of color rendition fall short compared to a proper scanner. I reckon once you've tried the flextight and seen the potential you won't look back haha! Slides scan brilliantly on the flextights too, especially newer models as the color software pretty much does all the color work for you!
I used to work at a lab and supported a Flextight scanner. That thing was amazing but it did have issues. I would get on the phone with support and they would guide me on how to open up the scanner and make adjustments when it would get stuck. If you ever are lucky enough to get one of these make sure you have a nice tool set.
It would be cool to see a 35mm scanning done with the X5 and the coolscan, compared to a scanning done with a Plustek (and a Frontier too). Just to see what´s that difference between a 25000$ scanner and a 250$ one
That’d be really cool to find out actually, I’ll have to see if I can find someone that’d let me use their plustek around here! I have a suspicion that the scans might actually be pretty decently comparable based of the few things I’ve seen online!
Interesting, but from the Coolscan picture I suspect, that it was not scanned with neutral settings, it seems like the picture is sharpened and that the whites are clipped ( white point not set to 0) In Nikon Scan, Advanced Color: Auto contrast calculations (% excluded). Or try a test with Vuescan. Choose color balance = none for testing.
Glad you found it interesting! The coolscans histogram was set to 0 - 255 in the default software but I do reckon the clipping might've been some other fault in the setup - the lab asked that I not mess with their default settings on the coolscan as it is quite temperamental for them and they didn't want me to crash their software. I shall in future be giving the coolscan the absolute best chance to get the most out of a negative though and do a true comparison of results that way as opposed to just comparing default software as I did in this video!
@@willysheepskin Here are my suggested Vuescan settings. www.datanord.dk/tips-tricks/nikon-coolscan-vuescan-settings/ If you want a "flat" picture with no white or black clipping (for testing) choose color balance = none. For daily use choose "neutral". By the way, I see some Frontier scanners in the video. I think a comparison of the Coolscan and Frontier or Noritsu could be interesting.
Scanning on a Flextight X5 made me realize how "bad" other scanners were lol. I think you could have also mentioned the fact that you can scan 2 types of files with the X5: 3F and Tiff. 3F being the equivalent of RAW files in the digital world. I personally really like color management on the Imacon software but I, unfortunately, cannot run it on my Macbook pro anymore... I also have to add that it seems to me that the X5 manages to get more dynamic range than other scanners. (It could also be due to the fact that consumers' labs just want to go fast and don't pay attention to Highlights clipping as much). Anyway cool video as always William! 😁
I should’ve mentioned that for sure man! I did point out in my pinned comment about 3F’s though, shall have to get into that more sometime in the future haha! Bummer that you can’t run the scanner on your Mac anymore, I think flexcolor stopped working with Catalina right? The dynamic range is also probably my favorite thing about the imacons too, this one has a DMax of 4.9 I think and mine only has one of like 3.9 but still manages to function really nicely! We should have a chat about these bad bois sometime always looking to improve my knowledge haha! Your latest studio shoot was rad btw, don’t think I commented but both the digi and film photos were nuts - was actually really into some of the wide angle digi stuff haha!
@@willysheepskin Yes, Catalina doesn't let me run old softwares like the Flexcolor one anymore.... And my bad, I didn't notice your pinned comment hahaha. And for sure we can have a chat about it! But I fear that you probably have much more experience with it than me. I've only scanned on the X5, 3 projects of mine so far. 😅 And about my video, thank you! All the film scans were made on a Hasselblad X5 hehe. As for the wide angle digi, I would love to try doing the same on film but I feel like I would never be able to accurately focus with the way I frame my Wide shots haha.
I think the Flextights only run on Flexcolor actually - or at least that's all I've ever seen them run on. Would be interesting to test that out for sure though!
@@willysheepskin I guess you mentioned that you can scan in raw file. You can put raw in Silverfast HDR or something like that. It has the same tools for 48bit files as for scanners
The strartup wait of the Nikon is a self-calibration similar to Frontiers. I don't think the Nikon or Hassel scanners are for "production" enviroments to scan hundreds of rolls, just for punctual work.
Ah that makes sense! And for sure bulk/speed isn’t their intended use and they’re definitely both great at what they do, I wasn’t really trying to put one or the other down just wanted to observe and convey what the user experience was like! Thanks for the insight!
Hey man, I really appreciate the work you did on this comparison-I understand the game but very few photogs/scanner operators seem interested in comparing high end/professional tools when new methods and consumer gear generate so many clicks-but the way in which you structured this comparison renders it mostly meaningless. You note in the beginning of the video that you’re scanning color negative and letting the two different scanning software suites handle the inversion because as you state you mean to test both scanner and software but to my knowledge it is impossible to test both at once for color negative film. Flexcolor, nikonscan, vuescan, and silverfast all use different inversion matrices, black/white point setting, etc which means that any difference in color, apparent dynamic range, clip point, etc may-and probably do-come down to software without telling us anything about the quality of the optics and ccd in the hardware itself. These differences are important for lab scanners like Noritsus and Frontiers because the customer is not the scan operator and most technicians will batch convert, which means that the customer is stuck with the scanner’s inbuilt software bias, but one of the benefits of scanning at home is control over these factors. Of course not all home scan operators will employ more advanced workflows but we should then be explicit about testing different automatic inversion solutions rather than attributing differences in software to differences in hardware, which confuses an already very confusing space. For example, the specular highlights on the thumb in your test picture speak to different white point settings, not a difference in information collected by the scanner. The dMax of color negative film is actually so low that both scanners can easily capture all the information available on it. A fair, meaningful comparison of the scanner hardware would require either making linear raw scans from each (this is possible in flexcolor through the 3f workflow as you noted but it’s also easily done in both nikonscan and vuescan by choosing raw output) and processing them using the same inversion software (eg negative lab pro or colorperfect) or-even better due to increased inherent dMax-scanning a frame of transparency film in both scanners. As it stands this video allows us to compare the relative sharpness of each scanner and the quality of their automatic inversions but we cannot draw any conclusions about these scanners’ color capture or dynamic range, ie the “look” of each scanner, which is what I’d imagine most folks are interested in discovering. Again I appreciate the effort you put into exploring an important but esoteric topic-all of us film photographers should endeavor to become scanner operators as well, as the electronics on noritsus and frontiers will all inevitably fail-but more clarity regarding what you’re testing here (inversion software) and better testing methodology to target what you meant to test (quality differences between scanner hardware) would go a long way toward disambiguating this difficult topic. The scanning space needs a charismatic, knowledgeable presenter like you because right now it’s all old forum posts and enthusiastic amateurs. (Fwiw I’ve found imacons to have a slight edge in sharpness and an even slighter edge in dMax over Nikon scanners but it takes printing above 24” to even begin to spot a slight difference and even then the difference in dMax only matters for transparencies).
Hi Spencer! Thanks so much for this super thoughtful and kind approach to pointing out some of the failings of this video, you’re definitely correct that the approach wasn’t the most thorough way to test the true limits of each scanner but since the comparison was kind of spur of the moment I figured I’d just see what sort of results one could get with things set up pretty much standard like most users would run the machines as opposed to a thorough comparison in the manner you describe. Everything you’ve pointed out with regards to technique in order to get comparable results maintaining maximum detail is absolutely correct though, I think I did point out in the video that I was going to use the standard softwares as opposed to workarounds in this test but I would quite like to revisit this topic at some point and set it up in a manner that allows for both scanners to exhibit their maximum potential! The lab has unfortunately since sold the coolscan though so I’m going to have to wangle access to another one locally sometime haha, but your level headed approach to discussing the failings of this video has got me interested in it again now. I had considered revisiting it soon after the first one but the amount of really mean feedback this video got from people that didn’t actually pay attention to what I pointed out kind of put me off it. You’ve reignited the interest for sure though so will see what I can do! Thanks again for your kind approach, and really great to receive a comment from someone that very clearly also knows what they’re doing but doesn’t feel a need to lord it above others, hope you have an excellent day!
@@willysheepskin thanks for responding on an older video! I do my scanning on a coolscan atm but am considering an imacon and yr seemingly the only person online who's done a comparison as a working photog with actually interesting work, not just some luminous landscapes guy with a million dollars. I find the digital archaeology required to get good results out of these old scanners really fun and I think a lot of us as artists could benefit from better understanding the process--especially when almost all of our work remains digital nowadays scanning is as close to the darkroom/hand printing as most of it gets so understanding eg color spaces at least for me helps me consider my work for exhibition rather than just shooting it straight into a hard drive. Dslr scanning/NLP is great as an accessible workflow but I think that some videos doing a real deep dive on the nitty gritty of lab quality scanning would be super fresh and helpful and I think you could present that info really well if you ever had the time and interest to do it. There's so much more information and potential for control over the final image in especially color negatives than most folks realize (eg I see loads of blown out skies in NLP scans), especially with so many folks scanning at home nowadays. Sorry to see all the shit feedback--I wish folks were more open to learning and discussing rather than scoring meaningless dunks, especially when there's so much misinformation out there. As an intro I found this vid a super useful jumping off point and I'd love to see a follow up. Hope you have a good one too!
13:30 be careful with Digital Ice : it nothing more than the « Dust and Scratches » filter fine tuned between the radius + threshold. It will blend new pixels together with artifacts and remove fine detail. It’s probably time saving for small prints but you don’t want to use this option for bigger prints or high quality scans. So, The best way to compare both scans is to remove the digital ice option and scan the negative by cleaning it before.
Well now... after spending an enormous amount on the Nikon 9000...used... now I need a Flextight apparently. Sheesh... Kidding, well I'd like one, but as you pointed out, it just doesn't make sense for a hobbyist, though to be fair the 9000 is probably overkill as well.
Haha I reckon the 9000 gets moooore than enough out of a negative for sure - my examples here were just running default software too, so I reckon with enough tinkering and setup the 9000 can have glorious colors, great sharpness and biiig sizes without having to go all the way up to an Imacon, the 9000 is in fact a bunch faster than my 343 for max res scans so it'd be nice to have for that at the very least!
also at 14:38 you missed one advantage of the flextight scan, the skin tone!, it looks a lot warmer, and better than the 'coolscan' one, which looks a little cooler, and for skin maybe a little too blue?
Awesome video as always. I use the vuescan software with my cool scan 9000 and I am happy with the results esp slide film. I think ice reduces the image quality but this could well be user error :)
Thanks Oz! And Ice for sure does have an impact, I kind of wanted to let both scanners act in a manner that would show their best features and compare results that way for this video, when I revisit it I’ll definitely be giving both scanners the best chance to shine
The lab actually suggested I come back sometime and try out all the different software they have for the CoolScan so I would be keen to experience the variations in quality and speed
Hello Again! Hope You are doing well. So recently I came across some guys from Stuttgart Germany who sell, develop and scan Kodak Vision 3 film on a Apollon 14k Scanner. So would like to hear your thought about it. I really loved the negatives they emailed me. If you want I can send you some samples
One of the first things I do when I use a Nikon Coolscan to scan a microscope slide is repeat the scan a few times and make an average (median) scan to filter out random (electronic derived) noise and extend the dynamic range. Is that a method which photographers use to improve scan quality from these lower-end scanners?
I'm a bit familiar with big Coolscans and recommend to check scanners condition (cleanliness) and software workflow. Original Nikonscan can be a bit annoying in handling but it's the best, you need the knowledge for best settings. I guess there is not a big difference in quality between flextight and coolscan, maybe in processing speed. Thumbs up for your comparing!
Glad you enjoyed it! Will for sure be giving both scanners the best opportunity to shine in a future video for a comparison like that as well, and investigate the best coolscan settings haha!
Thanks for checking it out! The v850 isn't really even comparable unfortunately, color, size, sharpness etc just aren't there on the flatbeds. It does have digital ice though which means not as many dust issues as the Imacon scanners haha!
Does the Flextight really have a CCD sensor or does it use the more modern CMOS technology? I wish there was a comparo with the lovely Frontiers-my favorite lab scanner.
Yep it's referred to as a CCD in all the manuals and sales documents I've looked at! I can very easily do a color comparison with the frontiers actually - a future video idea!
@@willysheepskin ahhhh okay. You might be aware that some people believe the CCD sensor, a deprecated tech is actually superior to CMOS in its color rendering. I love the look from the Fuji Frontier… certain early Leica digital M cameras have also made true believers out of the CCD.
thanks for the informative video, im looking to get an older imacon (I know they are trouble but I'm potentially getting one for free so that is fine), my teacher has one he doesn't use that he has stayed the wold give me if I cold get it to work, do you have like a list of things that I wold need to do such a thing? have had trouble finding exactly what I need to get! thanks!
we have a flextight 848 at my school that i use, one annoying thing that it does is the mask/negative moves slightly when you preview/scan, so you often have to adjust the crop a couple times before you’ve scanned one frame. do you or someone else who has used this scanner, adjust the colors in the flexcolor program or do you run a completely flat scan and edit afterwards? it can be extremely time consuming adjusting the colors and im wondering what really is the best way of doing it.
Hi. what is Your toughts on epson750 flatbed scanner ? cannot decide should i get one or not , or its complate waste of money and You dont suggest it ? thnx
It's a shame they no longer make these (both the Nikon and Flextight). I wish someone would make something equivalent or HB would sell the rights to someone else... Have you tried the "new" Plustek OpticFilm 120 Pro? It seems to have specs quite similar to the Nikon Coolscan 9000ED but can be purchased new. I'd be curious to see output from this but there is next to no information available online.
I have a fantaatic 35mm Kodacgrome 64 slide of Sarel Van Der Merwe's Kreepy Krawly March Porche from 1984 that couldn't have been panned any better. 1/125 and 5.6 with a big long waste gate flame shooting out the back. The background and foregroumd blurred wheel spin blur but the edges of the rims tack sharp as well as the body. I'm only babbling about it because you seem to be a South African. How large a digital file can the 'blad scanner make from a 35mm slide, in megaixels. Enough for a 300dpi A1 print?
The shadows around the thumb are not deep shadows that only a high Dmax scannner would bring up in a transparency(this was a neg....shadow area is a very thin area). It was a matter of the mid tone slider being set differently. As for highlight, likely the same issue with the NIkon 9000, (color negs are not dense, it was your settings, you didn't try to match, nor did you show the histogram, but than you said the lab guy did the setting up for you). I have the Nikon 9000, and you just convinced me the X5 is clearly not worth the money for me(only when time is a factor, like in a lab). Regarding muddiness, you do have to adjust color/brightness...before you make comparisons like that. Your comment that 3200spi is the limit is not true...more closer to 5000 depending on film used. Also, you talk about the benefits of time with the X5, but than you run the Nikon with ICE on. That slows it down a lot. You should have used a transparency, and see how far both dig into the deep shadows, and showed us your settings used. The Imacon is faster to work with, more durable for commercial use, does 4x5 (big deal), does 8000spi for 35mm (wow), is glassless, and great film holders, and has dust removal (not sure if optional). You pay a lot for those benefits. The Nikon will do 617 when stitched, is best with glass carriers by Nikon (with ANR glass), and has ice to rid the dust. I've had labs give me film back with all sort of dirt (dust was not the main problem).....without ICE, a lot of work. Frankly, it is like comparing a Ferrari and a chevy....both get get you there, one is faster, but most of us do not need the speed and prefer the better ride (ICE). I saw no benefit with 120 film (resolution only 3200 on X5). Also I rather scan 612/617 film with the nikon (stitched at 4000spi), rather than the 2040spi (samples per inch for scanners) the X5 does for 4x5/612.
Hi! Any chance you could get into the details of how to get a Flextight running on a modern computer? I've been offered to lend a Flextight Precision III, if I can get it running! Doing the research so far it either seems that I need to get a G5 Mac, or a Windows7 computer with a SCSI-interface... Read something about ONE type of Firewire-adapter that could work, but it was like 300€/$... Would love to know what gear and cables you are running it on! If I can't get it to work, the studio that owns it also has a Phase One with a 200mp digital back... So I might end up trying to "Dslr scan" my neg's that way.. But would really like to get the scanner going. And thank you for an awesome video!
Hi Daniel! You can get a Piii running on a modern machine, but it is actually vaaastly easier to get it going on older software. I personally built/sourced 5 different machines before I got mine running smoothly! I tried two G5's but they're actually not too great, the G4 is what most people run precisions on and they're quite good at staying connected BUT the G4's are ancient at this point and finding parts can be tricky! The way I run my scanner is on a dedicated windows XP machine with an Adaptec SCSI card and nothing but flexcolor software on the computer haha! I then transfer files via USB, although I could probably set up a shared folder between it and my Win10 Machine if I wanted to come to think of it! The X5 in this video does run on a windows7 machine, but the X5 is firewire by default and thus doesn't need that very fallible adapter and getting firewire running properly on newer windows is much easier than a SCSI setup. My advice would be to source a cheap old XP machine and a scsi card and to never look back haha, I sure haven't! In terms of comparison to your facilities Phase One setup, I've heard from people that have tried that that sharpness and rendition are very good, but the colors are a real struggle to dial in which is the main benefit of using an Imacon because the color potential is glorious! Takes some practice but there's still nothing out there that comes close to a good Imacon scan in my eyes Hope that helps! Let me know if you need any clarification!
@@willysheepskin Thank you soooo much William! I was just about to buy a G5! I think I have and old XP-tower somewhere. Or I can try to get my 2010-ish PC to get a partition with XP on it. I also have some Mac Pro 3.1 and 5.1, but I presume these won't work? My friend might have a G4... But I'll gladly take the words of an expert and just start with an XP-build! Looking at the Adaptec I read many like the Ava-2906 card, would you agree? If so, I guess I'll start with buying one of them! Yeah, I realized the X5 had FW after I posted! Cnet has this spec-sheet on the PIII that says it has Scsi AND FW, but I realized they must be wrong, right? I'll gladly skip the whole Phase One project if the colors are better on the PIII. I looked at your website and I will gladly admit that I was alooong time ago I saw such beautiful colors and motives! Really Awesome work! I'd love to keep you posted, would it be okay if I stalked you on social media instead, and let the convo go on in the DM's?
@@danielabrahamsson5769 That is indeed the correct adaptec card! I found mine as part of an old Jaz drive setup someone was getting rid of here and in spite of it being in questionable condition it still works like a bomb haha! You can buy them cheap on ebay too, and you'll need an hd-50 to hd-50 scsi cable to connect the scanner to it! I'm actually not very well versed on the Piii so it could in fact have a firewire port, I did think that the entire precision line was scsi but stand to be corrected haha! A few friends run Pii's though and those are definitely only scsi. The iii's seem quite rare around here for some reason. I'm glad the color work comes across on the site haha! It took a few thousand hours but I'm finally at a point where I can get colors pretty much in line with where I want them and can always go back for revisions if needed lol! The key with Imacons is patience, and research, but you already seem very well versed compared to most who are keen on getting into these dinosaur scanners so I reckon you'll be off to a strong start! Please feel free to drop me a line on Instagram any time, I respond to messages asap there!
So is it not possible to do full rebate scans with the Hasselblad Flextight X5? I'm thinking probably not because you have to put the film in a holder.
I don't understand why nobody is selling a modern, compact scanner that takes 100MP medium format negative scans and about 25MP 35mm scans What more do you really need?. Priced about the same as a semi-pro camera and good reliability. I would give up my own copy-stand dslr scanning setup in a heart beat.
I'd absolutely love if someone came out with a system like that, the demand for even basic home DSLR negative transport systems seems to be high enough that some company could justify designing a modern scanner with nice color and resolution to fill that niche. I guess all we can do is hope for now though, I for one would be very keen on it if the results were satisfactory!
great reference video for the rest of us, but this has given me G.A.S. for one 😞 such a shame dji took Hasselblad over, and they no longer make these, a good product, giving drum scanning to the massess.
Me too man! This sort of tech is in an interesting place, because it's all just getting older and less reliable but simultaneously more expensive with every new listing. Would be radical if somehow new technology could provide very similar results at a much lower cost
@@willysheepskin I agree. The cost of getting lab scans or getting my own scanner (that's not a flat bed) is the only reason why I haven't gotten into medium format. I was excited for the release of the Plustek 120 Pro, but it's rather pricey and apparently already has some issues out of the box too. Not sure what good options I have to be honest.
Just realized I neglected to mention one of the nicest features of the Imacons which is 3F scanning - a feature exclusive to the Flextights that allows one to edit the scan as if it were still in the scanner. A sort of "Raw" mode for scans, so if this is well received I'll make a video on some more Imacon stuff sometime and speak about that very useful feature haha!
*Edit*
Someone has pointed out to me that the CoolScan scans with a Monochrome CCD sensor and thus can't have color noise as I suggested at 12:50 , to err is human and I reckon that may not have been the best way to describe the murkiness in the color I observed. I don't know anything about the CoolScan beyond what Christiaan showed me last night as I filmed this, and only wanted to use a scan from it for the sake of comparison to a benchmark people might be familiar with. Apologies for that misnomer, this video is intended to provide some insights into the X5 and Imacons, there are many lovely videos out there on the CoolScan from people that know all about it so if you want to learn more about them I recommend checking some of those out. - Kyle McDougall has some great ones.
I'd also definitely recommend checking out this website; www.filmscanner.info/en/HasselbladFlextightX5.html for very detailed insights and reviews into the scanners as kindly suggested by Nico Cazals!
I would suggest to add under your video the links to "filmscanner . info" website reviews of both scanners as a good resource for those who want to know further about these scanners. It's a pretty good website to know how scanners compare. They even provide their ranking in the Film Scanner Buy section.
just pin this comment ✌️
It’s not exclusive to those, you can do the same with the Imacons.
@@pablovi77 Think my use of "Imacon" and "Flextight" interchangably might have been confusing, but yes as a 343 owner you can scan 3F on all Imacons :)
Then why you loose our time with your bullshit "comparisons"? You are smart-ass and you want money from RUclips posting bullshit nonsence ? Its too much profanity and amateurism already in the world due to dummy "gurus" like you. Stop publishing, find a daddy and go to wedding trip with him leave professionals to make reviews and share REAL knowledge. Otherwise soon all professional domains will gone forever and everything become a deep amateurism that do not serve of progress of humanity.
When I was in my 20s I produced a calendar that was sold nationwide in the US at bookstores like Barnes & Noble, Waldenbooks and B Dalton. I photographed the calendar using a Nikon N90 (and 8008s) and oversaw the scanning. The scanning company we employed used a drum scanner that costs as much as a home. I say all this to say, you really know what you're talking about and it's refreshing to see someone on RUclips who actually knows this field. As someone said, "a 17 minute video without bullshit? Truly astounding." Couldn't have said it better myself.
Ah thank you so much, so glad to hear that someone with proper experience in the real world use of things saw the merit of this video! So cool that you had a calendar sold nationwide when you were in your 20's too! Must have been a great feeling!
a 17 minute video without bullshit? Truly astounding. Appreciate the lowdown. May try an imacon now. The DR captured is wonderful.
Glad none of it came across as bullshit Limerant, thanks haha! I highly recommend trying out an Imacon, they can bring new life to even the overlooked negs!
How do you try one?
There isn’t a more thorough, well explained overview of hi end scanning on RUclips. Dude thank you so much for this 🙏 incredible insight
Ah thanks so much Brandon, really glad you got something out of it! Hope to provide more insights in the future, and maybe catch you at CFS sometime haha!
The sound when you hit scan on the X5 just brought back a lot of memory's for me. The university I went to had a bank of four X1's in their lab all hooked up to some old school 4,1 Mac Pros (which solved the FireWire issue) and precise colour calibrated screens. I spent literal hours in that darkened room retouching dust - which to be fair was rather annoying in a pinch but, when you finally see your A0 print come out the other side and hung, all that struggle and time spent becomes worth it in my eyes.
Great video, man. Enjoyed it thoroughly.
Ah that sounds amazing Rob! My uni had a similar setup which is where my desire to own one was born haha! I actually had to try 4 different computer setups for my 343 before I got it running smoothly on an old Windows XP machine - most stressful 4 months of my life not knowing if I was going to get it working haha!
I should print some of these max res files A0, seeing how nicely Imacon scans print really is a transcendent experience!
I actually do a lot of work dusting other peoples A0 stuff too so I kind of go into a meditative state when I'm dusting at this point which is nice lol!
Really glad to hear that you enjoyed the video, I'll put out some more Imacon stuff at some point for sure!
Depending on where you are in the US, your local community college might have one these Hasselblad scanners for the low price of taking a class.
That's really really good advice actually, I know the university archive here even has a few that they'll let people use if they can be convinced that the work is worth archiving haha!
@@willysheepskin as someone with an interest of archiving as an artistic practice that's really cool to hear that they're willing to do that!
Maybe I’ll get a chance to make a video there someday! I’m sure they have super rad stuff, I’m also super into archiving in that sense - there was a Stanley Kubrick archive at my uni that got that interest rolling haha! I think the archive facility has been impacted by the recent fire though, I’m actually working on archiving an old school photographers stuff currently as a result of that - at least I think that’s why he switched to having me do it. Hoping they get back up and running though so I can reach out and see what things look like!
It’s free if you work at that lab or photo department.
My college has one, just take the photoshop class for like $130 bucks and you get to use it
It would be super nice to see the process on Flexcolor and then the editing of the scans. I also want to wish you all the best William! I know you're battling cancer and that's something only the people going through and their family know about. I really like all the content you have put out and your photography work. I hope you recover as fast as possible so we get to see all your ideas soon!
Fantastic review. Your attention to detail, understanding of technology as well as photographic image quality is second to none. Thank you
Great video - no surprises re Flextight being superior - but out of reach for most non professionals......
Tthe Nikon MF scanners are still way better than flatbed scanner.
Subscribed!
Nothing more satisfying than watching Will scan negatives on ludicrous scanners that I may never even see in person haha great video dude!
Thanks Reimann! Someone suggested in the comments that community colleges might provide access to an Imacon in exchange for doing short courses which could be a reasonable ‘in’ to try out an Imacon and learn something at the same time haha!
@@willysheepskin I might have to look into that
you know its good when i saw the scan before you even mentioned it was was the blad and i went oooh thats niceee
Damn, dude! I just acquired a brand new Coolscan V after years of salivating over it and now this! I know the guy in my town, who has Imacon Photo with the Mac G3 to boot, he'd sell it to me, but I can't justify the cost. Since Coolscan V can't take a medium format film, I don't buy MF camera. Knowing how appaling results from my Epson V600 are in 35 mm, I'll be disappointed in scanning medium format as well, so there's that.
Incredible 0-bullshit video! A breath of the fresh air on RUclips.
Glad you enjoyed it man! That Coolscan V should be really good for your 35mm stuff though, to be honest most imacons are really bad for anything below 120! My 343 for example I cant use for 35mm because it just takes sooooooo loooooong. The results are good but just far too tedious to get. I reckon your Coolscan will serve you well! Sell prints of the photos you scan with it and turn the print money into an Imacon someday haha! Honored to be a breath of fresh air!
Thank you for posting this. Really nice to see a no-nonsense video comparing the 2. I like the Nikon personally as it made mincemeat of negs that had dust/scratches that would have to be dealt with on the imacon. It's just a lot of post to deal with, especially if you have a lot of negs to deal with.
Thanks for watching! I'm glad you enjoyed! I too am a large fan of the Digital ICE on the Nikon, I spend countless hours retouching dust off imacon scans, and most of my income comes from coloring/dusting other peoples imacon scans so it gets to be quite exhausting haha!
The major difference for me is that I HAVE the Nikon scanner.
Ah congratulations! I reckon one can get perfect results out of it with time and experience, I was just comparing base scans that would show the benefits of each machine, shall do a more in depth high end comparison in future
I like that you are presenting this in the style of 1980s television presentations 😂. Honestly I like it.
Would love to see how it compares to a high end DSLR scan (pixel shift). $25,000 could get you about six top of line mirrorless set ups. Lmao maybe four or five top of the line setups if you add all of Negative Supply's stuff. It is crazy fast though.
That sounds like something that would be fun to try out! And yeah man the price of this thing only really makes sense if the owners specific intent is to scan as much as possible as fast as possible in very nice quality - the actual quality of the scans isn't really even that much better than my 343 though, might have to do a thorough comparison on that at some point too haha!
These are also going to become more and more scarce as the years go on as well so I reckon DSLR scanning setups are for sure the way of the future, I'd even bet with enough tinkering one could get the DSLR scans to have the same sort of colors as an Imacon! Probably worth investigating considering the amount of distressing noises my scanner is making these days lolol
Very nice video, the main difference is a CCD (charge coupled device) in this unit, a drum scanner uses a PMT (photo multiplier tube) The dynamic range is massive with a PMT and the oil mount optically eliminates dust and scratches in the base of the film... Odd note, I have had a Rodenstock lens from an analog process camera I used to shoot color seps on, ive used it as a paper weight for ages, it was far too nice to toss out when we trashed the camera... That lens f4-f22 was $20,000 back in the late 70's! Anyway these are nice machines!
My local studio has a Imacon Flextight 949. Will have to check it out.
I had a chat with a mate about speeds after making this and the 949 is actually 200mbs compared to the x5’s 300mbs - and the x1’s 60mbs. So the 949 should be very very fast too!
Great video! would love to see more videos on high end scanners. noritsu or some of the other imacons you mentioned. Cheers!
Oooh maybe I can convince a lab with a noritsu around here to let me try things out that would be fascinating for sure, especially to maybe compare to a frontier! Could also do a video on my more modestly priced and functional 343, keep an eye out I reckon haha!
So sick! My university has one of these and I think I'll have access to it in the Fall
Awesome man! It’ll blow your mind I’m sure!
Great vid! But can you show us how you fo your DSLR scans?
Thank you! I’ve never actually done high end DSLR scans myself, I’ve just seen very impressive results from people around! Using medium format digital cameras and stitching together macro frames seems to render very impressive results, very curious to actually try out someone’s setup in the future though
Great Video. After looking at many options I ended up getting my own frontier because I wanted to be in control of my scanning workflow and I love its output.
Thanks Marc! Awesome that you have a frontier! I had a couple of chances to pick one up some years ago but it always came down to space and how bulky the SP-3000 setups are. Someday maybe! The speed of them always amazes me, would love to have one or even a Noritsu
@@willysheepskin It was a bit of a crazy idea, I had to rent a van to pick it up and got 3 friends to help me carry it to the third floor. If you are just doing 35 mm i think the SP500 is also a great alternative. I had a Pakon before that, but to me the Frontier tones are what I love the most. Would not mind a Noritsu either.
@@MarcS4R Haha I love that! Cape Film Supply here is buying all the ones they can find for the sake of maintaining them and having backups - and they have to go through a similarly arduous process transporting them every time from what I have seen haha! I'd definitely pick up an SP500 or Pakon if one showed up locally since the prices tend to be substantially lower than international going rates. Don't think the Noritsus will ever be cheap again at this point though haha!
Most instructive. I read a review from a Scan service in Europe which suggested to have two devices in production, just in case one needs to be send in for maintenance and repairs as you describe. - The difference between the 'out of the machine scans' is shocking.🤦♂
Glad you enjoyed it! The two device tip is indeed a great one!
I got an Imacon 343 shortly before Hasselblad bought them. It’s not as fast as the bigger scanners, but makes incredible scans of 35mm and medium format films. Unfortunately it has spoiled me and I fear the day it eventually dies. There is a clarity in the detail of the image that I just haven’t seen from other desktop scanners.
That’s awesome Lars! Glad to hear it’s still working for you, I picked my Hasselblad branded 343 up a few years ago and both of its firewire ports promptly died on me haha! So I run mine via the Scsi port now - which I guess is good to know is an option if the firewire ports fail at least! May our 343’s live on in glorious color and average speed eternally hahaha!
I have one too - with very low usage. I worry more about the parts drying up or something as I have 't used it much the past few years. But it stays in AC and all, never in storage. The seller put it through the service (about $250 back in 2008) just before I bought it, which I think they replace the belt and calibrate it. Have you had any issues with yours at all?
@@vinidajackal Mine has slight creaking noises that pop up when the drum is towards the end of its rotation and could probably use some lubrication, however I'd much rather have it break in some physical manner than a software break to be honest! If the motherboard or sensor or even the scsi port at this point decided to stop working there would be nothing I could do. The belts, lubrication and other physical parts I can at least see myself managing to somehow replace or have machined - although i'd much rather just have it run forever haha!
Impressively interesting and kindly done so that the uninitiated moi learned a great deal. Thank you for that!
Thank you very much for watching! I am very happy to have taught you something haha!
For deep amateurs like may be it can be interesting. We have an expression :in the kingdom of blinds, the one-eye is the king.
Super informative! As someone who uses my partner’s D850 to scan my negatives because I’m broke I can only dream about getting a dedicated scanner lol. I never would’ve thought to push Ektar 100 two stops though 😂 that gave me a good chuckle.
Nice Video bro. I used to work in a photo lab on a cruise ship. so this brings back good memories :)
Woah Tim you've just blown my mind, I had no idea that cruise ships would have photo labs on them! It makes sense though I guess, no time to drop off holiday snaps during stops so just do it on the boat haha! That's so cool! Glad you enjoyed the video too!
Excellent video! I own the Flextight 343 now since about 15 years ago - you forgot to mention a huge quality spec is the true colorbit depth is 16 bits per color for 48 bits total - same as the 9000 true however the noise is extremely low unlike the 9000 as you demonstrated. Do this test: scan a black medium format slide, then look at the RGB values from pixel to pixel - amazing that the noise only flips occasionally at the least significant digit - truly remarkable.
I'm glad you enjoyed it Vincent! Rad to have another fellow 343 owner stop by haha, I should've mentioned the color depth indeed! I'll try shoot a blank slide and scan it sometime, it sounds like a fascinating and satisfying exercise!
Are you sure it is not grain you are looking at, which you will not see at 3200 resolution so easily.
Loved watching this comparison. There’s a guy local to me selling a 646 and it sparked my interest. I’d love to see a comparison with high end mirrorless scanning setups. I’ve seen some people using the Fuji GFX line for scans and I’d like to see how it compares to a flextight.
Thanks Chandler! The 646 is a really solid machine, I believe some people even prefer them to newer ones because they added the diffused light source situation after the 646 and some reckon it's actually sharper than later models because of it! I'm super keen on trying out a GFX scanning setup, I've seen some examples online as well and they look really impressive!
@@willysheepskin so dont buy a Flextight today?
Great video! I have the X1 and can't imagine scanning with anything else. The colors are just unbeatable.
Thanks Andrew! So awesome that you have an X1! It’s actually strange I’ve been comparing these scans to the scans I get from my 343 now and the way the x5 renders color is actually quite different in a nice way, the color blend is somehow even softer and cleaner on the newer ones it seems than on mine! I reckon it might have something to do with the diffused light source situation they implemented after the 646, shall have to investigate some more haha! I hope your X1 brings you many more happy years of scans!
@@willysheepskin Yeah I think that's for sure from the diffused light source. I used to rent time on an X5 and then found a good deal locally on an X1 and went for it. There is for sure a difference between the X5 and X1 (X1 also has no diffuser. Only the 949 and X5 had that.) Ive found if you really lower the sharpening in flex color (-120) you can get that softer look somewhat. Love the videos! Keep up the great work
I absolutely love your reviews. - Would love to see a "scan off" between you on the Flextight X5 and a Coolscan enthusiast on the Nikon .. :-D
Haha that would be awesome if it could be organized!
Can you make some comparison between Frontier and Nikon ? Great video
Hi William. I enjoyed your video very much, especially the comparison of the Hasselblad X5 and the Nikon Coolscan. It didn't leave any doubt about which is the better scanner, especially with your compelling assessments of the images on screen.
Please skip all the way down to the numbered questions at the bottom of the page, if you don't want to take the time to read the long, probably somewhat boring chronology below. I wouldn't blame you, for sure.
I don't know if you are still responding to comments on this oldish video, but I hope you are, and that you might answer a few questions for me. I bought an Imacon Flextight 646 sometime in the early 2000's. I am an old school commercial/advertising photographer, operating my own business for over 40 years. As the onset of digital photography became inevitable, or at least the need for pros like me to give clients digital files of one sort or another, I had to find my way from a completely analog workflow, to being fully digital. I was very skeptical of the not-very-sharp digital cameras of those days, and the puny files they generated. The only other option was to buy a very good scanner to convert my large and medium format film images to digital images. I knew absolutely nothing about Photoshop, or much of anything about computers, but jumped into the deep end of the pool, because I didn't have a choice. I already had a relationship with a young guy, who worked in a very high end lab, initially scanning my film. He was probably doing much the same kind of work you do. I heard similarities in the way you speak and the way he spoke about the integrity of excellent quality scans. I hired this fellow to come on the weekends to teach me everything there is to know about how to think about digital imagery and all the underpinnings of digital files. At any rate, I bought the 646 because I had to do it if I was going to stay in business. My young friend was skeptical about the Flextight 646 in the same way I was about crappy digital cameras. His workflow was entirely with very high end drum scanners, costing in the tens of thousands of dollars, and he was a bit snotty about anything he deemed to be short of that technology. But I knew the files out of the 646 were more than adequate for my client's purposes, however much less pristine they may have been than those out of Heidelberg machines. Anyway, I learned everything I now know from this young fellow, and went on to confidently scan with my Imacon scanner and become very proficient in everything to do with digital images.But THEN the digital cameras got better, and the time it took to scan all the individual images my clients needed kept expanding. So, I bought digital cameras and put the Imacon in moth balls. Fast forward to today, when I hardly ever use the Imacon anymore. I am getting rid of all my old, unused equipment, now that I've retired, and am entertaining the thought of selling the 646. It is in perfect shape, and probably made far fewer scans than the average 646 may have done. I have several questions for you: 1. What is a perfectly operating Imacon 646 worth these days? 2. If the scanner is worth selling, what kind of person/photographer would want such a thing? How would I best find possible buyers? 3. When turning the machine on, a dialog box comes up, indicating X number of hours have passed, and that it is time to send the scanner in for service. I believe the warning is generated by the passage of time, rather than the number of scans that have been made. I DID send it in for service, shortly before I stopped using it altogether. The number of scans made since that time is miniscule. Is there a way to re-set the timer, so that no warning will be shown? Thanks for the great video, and also for your answers to my questions, if you ever do happen to see this entry.
Todd Pearson
www.toddpearsonphotography.com/
pretty nice! Im glad you are killing it men, last time i checked you only had 200 suscribers, keep it going! #nosocksgang
Thanks a ton man! Things have been kicking off around here for sure, so humbled! Shoutout to the nosocksgang!
Great comparison. I use Vuescan with my Coolscan, and scan as a positive raw. I then invert with a separate program. I never get any blown highlights or oversharpened feel with my 120 negatives, so I wonder if what you're seeing is mostly due to software and not hardware. Anyhow, keep up the great work!
Glad you enjoyed it Giuseppe! I reckon when the time comes to give both scanners the best chance to shine I'll do things that way, I think with the Nikon its downsides were mostly a failing of the default software and the way it was set up! When I try and compare them for the best results from each I hope to see more latitude from the Nikon for sure! And thanks I shall endeavor to keep it up!
Coolscan scans 120 Film
I know that digital ice makes things easier and I guess you wanted to show that. Comparing a scan with the ICE feature seems silly the digital ICE is always going to compress the contrast which is going to mean losing detail in the scan. I believe the manual for the cool scan expressly mentions this. I would rather see two scans compared totally "dry" out of the scanner. I have worked with Nikon cool scans for a long time and have had images scanned on the Ikon/Hasselblad. The Hasselblad is an awesome scanner.
I'll do that for sure when I do a proper full comparison of the results from these scanners rather than just comparing max res files with the base software! I did consider doing the scan without ICE on this day, but it didn't make sense since the main benefit of the CoolScan to me was the idea of ICE and running it without it wouldn't have illustrated that. Two totally dry images shall be compared soon though! - and a variety of other combos as well haha!
Good video. On. Your 99.7 % Color monitor, should get shields for the sides and top. Another one is in my scanning room get day Color leds. I think it’s 5000 kelvin. In future save and buy a Heidelberg d7100 scanner. Your doing a good job. Also walls should be painted white to. Match the outdoor lighting.
Thanks Mario! I do have light shields for the Eizo I use for proper color work thankfully, I reckon the daylight Leds would work a treat though, and I might repaint my grey wall white as I reckon that could help too! Thanks for the tips and kind words, I'd looove to own a Heidelberg someday!
I am very late to the game, but I have access to an Imacon 848 for scanning, and all I will say is, it is amazing. I had wanted to get a Coolscan 9000, but after scanning with an 848, I can't justify the purchase. I think the part I love most is that it focuses right down to the grain, and the colors are stunning. For the most part, an A0 Imacon scan is overkill, but I also have access to an A0 printer, so I plan to give it a shot.
Damn, that was incredibly interesting. Thank you! One can dream...
Really glad to hear you found it interesting! I reckon some dreaming and some trawling of the secondhand marketplaces might net you an Imacon eventually haha! I saw a precision i go for £1500 last week, which is still a bunch of money for sure but at least substantially less than the X5 to get access to some glorious Imacon colors haha!
@@willysheepskinDefinitely will keep my eyes open for one! I have always been in love with the colors in your photos
I just found your video and I am very impressed with your knowledge. I am of course not as knowledgeable as you about scanning and would love to get some information and/or opinion regarding a scanner for the amateur. If you would please advise I would appreciate and value your input.
Thanks Diane! Glad to come across that way! With regards to scanners for beginners, I personally just tinkered with DLSR scanning (using a digital camera to photograph negatives and then inverting them) and lab scans done on a Noritsu HS-1800 until I had saved up enough to afford my Imacon! I believe in terms of accessibility and relative simplicity flatbed scanners like the Epson V800 and other Epsons in that line are very simple to use, but the results can be somewhat lacking. I moved away from them very quickly when I was starting out. There are some really good videos on youtube about DSLR scanning and the inversion of those negatives though, and I would recommend that as the best way to get into digitizing negatives in a cost effective manner (if you already have a DSLR). Please feel free to message me on instagram if you have any further questions, @willysheepskin!
I have an older Nikon 4500 I'd like to get working and also a Epson 850 pro . Thank for your knowledge I'll stay tuned to keep learning
Thank you for this video! It was really informative. I’m curious: what are you thoughts on the Plustek negative scanner?
Wow, $25000 now! When I bought my Nikon Coolscan 9000 several years ago, I did look at the Flextight and it was around $10000 if I recall correctly, whereas the Coolscan was maybe half that, so I went with the Nikon. Had price not been a consideration I would almost certainly have bought the Flextight, as I do shoot some 4x5. I use Vuescan software and I’ve been very happy with the results printing up to 50x40cm. Recently I’m shooting more and more b&w and printing in the darkroom, so scanning is becoming less important to me.
Yeah its quite mental, all of the Imacon’s have gotten more expensive over the last couple of years , I think as they simultaneously become more scarce and well known the prices are increasing too! I’ve actually seen a couple of listings for higher prices than 25 which seems obscene given the amount of effort they can take to set up at times - there’s actually an 848 listed somewhere for 15,000 euros at the moment to give an idea of the inflation! I think I might have come across as more derogatory towards the coolscan than I intended in this video, but am very glad to hear that you’ve been able to achieve results you enjoy with yours! It is a truly great scanner, the flextights just have something to them that I haven’t seen replicated in other scans as of yet! I’ve also been getting more and more into the darkroom lately, I’m actually curious to try see what happens if I try scan some prints as reflective documents on the x5, would just have to try source a holder!
Okay so I’ve always wondered why 35mm flex tight scans have a higher dpi than medium format flex tight scans. If you print your work very often I’d love to see a video on your process.
Great video.
I'll for sure be putting together a print video in the not too distant future! Just lining things up and when it's all ready I'll get into the print stuff haha! Glad you learnt something!
Looking forward to it for sure!
My company is running a Creo iQsmart 3 and the Same sp-3000s that you have shown in your video. When purchasing the Creo, the Flextight x5 was a consideration and still could be in the future. In the end we opted for the Creo due to the price but also the workflow. Curious of your thoughts comparing the two. Also, we are being joined with a new partner soon who will bring with him a Phase One Cultural Heritage system. I'd also like your thoughts on that. We struggle with the color inversions with the POCH system.
That's awesome Greg! I don't have any experience with the Creo but from what I've read online it sounds like a great flextight alternative! The Phase One system also looks amazing but I haven't been near one either haha! With regards to color inversion though, there's a really good tutorial here on RUclips by a fella called Alex Burke where he shows his inversion process and explains how one can turn the steps into photoshop actions. It works really well, in the end it comes down to the eyes of the person doing the inversion but the process is definitely a solid way to go about it!
@@willysheepskin Thanks for the response William. I watched the Alex Burke video. It's basically a technique I worked with some time ago when trying to make this work with a DSLR capture of a color negative in PS. Yes, it does get it into the ballpark but it's not exactly simple and having to do things like change the colors of the sky to look like sky blue is a bit much for any kind of higher volume workflow. Still...his results has the same salmon color to some of the mid tone values that we're getting with the POPH system. I worked on one of the inversions P1 sent me and in the ACR, using the color mixer, I quickly got their inversion to the point I was pretty happy with it. Then I sent it to a colleague and he said "that looks pretty good but what's with the salmon color scattered in the mid tones". One of those things, once you see it you can't unsee it.
Yes...like you say "it comes down to the eyes of the person doing the inversion" ....but that said the inversions my Creo does isn't the same...it just simply works. I suspect your X5 is the same. Even our Espon V-750s do an okay job of it in general...as do as you're likely aware the Fuji SP-3000s.
Oh...and by the way, I really enjoyed your video. My own company needs to be producing some stuff like this.
need one
Nicely done. Would you happen to have the full unretouched images you used for comparison - 3200dpi Imacon and 4000dpi of the Coolscan?
William, great video and to the point. Much appreciated!
I'd be very interested to see a section of a 20x30 / 50 x 75 cm print from the Hasselblad and the Nikon scanners, viewed from about 3 - 4 ft / 1.0 - 1.3m. Prints are "what it's all about for me"
Also have you posted reviews of the other Imacon/Hasselblad scanners? How do they compare as they went through upgrades. Some of us still like dedicated scanners !
wow I really need a flextight
anyway, great video! really enjoyed your explanations
Keep an eye out locally to you! They sometimes pop up for very low prices because people don't know what they are - the precision line of scanners especially seem to show up in the strangest places for low prices haha!
Cries in epson v600🥲
Heey man we can manifest together and one day we'll get one to fall into your lap
@@willysheepskin 🙏🏾
Use Vuescan with the Nikon scanner. The profile used need to be correct.
Thanks for the tip! I shall do so next time, I figured this time it would be most fair to compare both scanners with their default software but will try to get the most out of the coolscan next time for a more detailed high end comparison! That was the first time I scanned anything with the coolscan and just wanted to see how things would match up by default out of curiosity!
My Imacon 848 will scan 5”x7” film. I presume the X5 is the same. 5”x7” film holders are available on the internet.
I scan a strip of 120 film, or 35mm in one pass at a higher rate and use Photoshop to separate the image after adjusting the group by levelling, cropping the borders and global adjustments, before cropping the individual images. I also scan 6x17” film which cannot be done with the Nikon.
Thanks for your review.
Ah yes I should’ve pointed out the specifics of it and how one can scan in very long strips - the holder I’m using in this video can actually do 6x17 haha! I’m jealous of your 848, maybe someday I’ll trade my 343 for one of them or a 949! Thanks for watching!
Really enjoyable and informative - am saving up!
Thanks Gareth! An Imacon will be worth saving for haha!
Overall a good comparison but I feel you can get an even better result from the Nikon 9000 with the ideas below. Also, if the mirror is dusty on the 9000 it can adversely affect IQ, and if it's never been serviced that's very likely the case.
Thanks John! I reckon one can definitely get more out of the coolscan, but as I said in the video in this instance I was just trying to compare the default software and see how it compared between scanners. I shall definitely make a video in future where I take into account all the useful tips provided here for the coolscan and give it the best chance to shine!
There is a scanning service near or in Boston that uses Imacon.
My university had a flextight. I could zoom in on that 35mm neg to an ASTOUNDING degree. For home though, I’d love a Nikon. I see that the pacific xa series is graining popularity however compared to the Nikon it appears that the Nikon has better color rendition. Not that you couldn’t edit the photo but yknow.
Dude was so informative and precise. Thank you so much for this.
Thank you for watching it my fellow William haha! Always glad to provide some insights into the mysteries of analog things!
Excellent tutorial! Very well done! Thank you for making this video.
Thanks Robert! Glad you enjoyed it!
I'd be curious to see the results if you just scanned both as positives and then converted it using Negative Lab Pro or something. Because a lot of the difference between the Hassi and Nikon came down to the difference in the rendering of colors/shadows, which is hard to pin down to the scanner vs the scanner software. Great video regardless!
Cheers Benjamin! I wanted to try out just the base scanner software for both scanners in this video to give an idea of how that looks, but if I revisit this comparison again I definitely reckon scanning as a positive and inverting manually or with nlp will be the strategy!
@@willysheepskin Ya, would be awesome to see that comparison! Since your quite experienced with scanning it seems, I'm curious what your thoughts are on this:
How do you think the CoolScan compares to a top end DSLR setup? I have the negative supply rig, with a Canon R5 and 100mm macro lens that I've been using, and the results are amazing, but the coolscan has some appealing features, mainly the ICE, so I'm curious what your thoughts are in regards to the quality of result between the two setups.
Scanning negative material on a Nikon 9000 definitely has more dynamic range if done as a positive. You can invert the curves in the scan software and view the neg as a positive, or invert it later in PS. Otherwise, I think some of your comparisons are swayed by vast contrast differences which should have been normalized for a meaningful comparison. The Nikon definitely has more than enough dynamic range for neg material, it is only transparencies that may be helped by the Imacon dynamic range. I find the Nikon can "bloom" around transparencies highlights. Reliability can not be overlooked, my 9000ED has functioned for almost 20 years straight now.
😯 THAT was informative as all get out! Hot dog William, thanks 🙏!!!
Thanks Justin, really glad you enjoyed it! I do seem to have said something ill informed about color noise with regards to the CoolScan, but like I say at the end of the day it's up to personal choice and the Imacon would be my choice to work with at least haha!
@@willysheepskin I’ve only ever used/use a flatbed because that’s my budget, but everything pretty much about that video was new info to me. I appreciate it! Thanks again 😊
very cool. solid. Great info !!
Thanks lonnie! Very glad you enjoyed!
Thanks for the very interesting presentations, even though I will stay with my low end gear :-) but in the meantime, after 4 years of experience my workflow with camera scanning (Sony a7) combined with the negativelabpro software leads to pretty good results
Glad you enjoyed it Etienne! Experience with tools trumps fancier gear I reckon, and if you move up into fancier equipment I reckon the lessons you've learnt with what you had on hand will pay off immensely anyway!
lovely and tremendously instructive. I have ‘some’ access to a Flextight, and as I am moving from medium format to 4x5 I am very interested in the potential. I am also moving into slide film, as the image quality I have got so far is really below (with an Epson) what I get with digital MF. As I integrate 4x5 in my workflow, ensuring quality along the process is key. Thank you.
Thanks Irene! Glad you found it informative! 4x5 Flextight scans are glorious, I so look forward to scanning 4x5 stuff when I get into that side of things someday, but the results that I have seen from friends and peers are sublime! The biggest benefit with a scanner designed for film is the way the colors are interpreted, Digital MF scans can be just as sharp and high quality, but in terms of color rendition fall short compared to a proper scanner. I reckon once you've tried the flextight and seen the potential you won't look back haha! Slides scan brilliantly on the flextights too, especially newer models as the color software pretty much does all the color work for you!
really enjoyed this
Thanks so much!
I used to work at a lab and supported a Flextight scanner. That thing was amazing but it did have issues. I would get on the phone with support and they would guide me on how to open up the scanner and make adjustments when it would get stuck. If you ever are lucky enough to get one of these make sure you have a nice tool set.
It would be cool to see a 35mm scanning done with the X5 and the coolscan, compared to a scanning done with a Plustek (and a Frontier too). Just to see what´s that difference between a 25000$ scanner and a 250$ one
That’d be really cool to find out actually, I’ll have to see if I can find someone that’d let me use their plustek around here! I have a suspicion that the scans might actually be pretty decently comparable based of the few things I’ve seen online!
Interesting, but from the Coolscan picture I suspect, that it was not scanned with neutral settings, it seems like the picture is sharpened and that the whites are clipped ( white point not set to 0) In Nikon Scan, Advanced Color: Auto contrast calculations (% excluded). Or try a test with Vuescan. Choose color balance = none for testing.
Glad you found it interesting! The coolscans histogram was set to 0 - 255 in the default software but I do reckon the clipping might've been some other fault in the setup - the lab asked that I not mess with their default settings on the coolscan as it is quite temperamental for them and they didn't want me to crash their software. I shall in future be giving the coolscan the absolute best chance to get the most out of a negative though and do a true comparison of results that way as opposed to just comparing default software as I did in this video!
@@willysheepskin Here are my suggested Vuescan settings. www.datanord.dk/tips-tricks/nikon-coolscan-vuescan-settings/ If you want a "flat" picture with no white or black clipping (for testing) choose color balance = none. For daily use choose "neutral". By the way, I see some Frontier scanners in the video. I think a comparison of the Coolscan and Frontier or Noritsu could be interesting.
Scanning on a Flextight X5 made me realize how "bad" other scanners were lol.
I think you could have also mentioned the fact that you can scan 2 types of files with the X5: 3F and Tiff.
3F being the equivalent of RAW files in the digital world.
I personally really like color management on the Imacon software but I, unfortunately, cannot run it on my Macbook pro anymore...
I also have to add that it seems to me that the X5 manages to get more dynamic range than other scanners.
(It could also be due to the fact that consumers' labs just want to go fast and don't pay attention to Highlights clipping as much).
Anyway cool video as always William! 😁
I should’ve mentioned that for sure man! I did point out in my pinned comment about 3F’s though, shall have to get into that more sometime in the future haha!
Bummer that you can’t run the scanner on your Mac anymore, I think flexcolor stopped working with Catalina right?
The dynamic range is also probably my favorite thing about the imacons too, this one has a DMax of 4.9 I think and mine only has one of like 3.9 but still manages to function really nicely!
We should have a chat about these bad bois sometime always looking to improve my knowledge haha! Your latest studio shoot was rad btw, don’t think I commented but both the digi and film photos were nuts - was actually really into some of the wide angle digi stuff haha!
@@willysheepskin Yes, Catalina doesn't let me run old softwares like the Flexcolor one anymore....
And my bad, I didn't notice your pinned comment hahaha.
And for sure we can have a chat about it! But I fear that you probably have much more experience with it than me.
I've only scanned on the X5, 3 projects of mine so far. 😅
And about my video, thank you!
All the film scans were made on a Hasselblad X5 hehe.
As for the wide angle digi, I would love to try doing the same on film but I feel like I would never be able to accurately focus with the way I frame my Wide shots haha.
It would be cool to see the same test but both scanners using silverfast
I think the Flextights only run on Flexcolor actually - or at least that's all I've ever seen them run on. Would be interesting to test that out for sure though!
@@willysheepskin I guess you mentioned that you can scan in raw file. You can put raw in Silverfast HDR or something like that. It has the same tools for 48bit files as for scanners
The strartup wait of the Nikon is a self-calibration similar to Frontiers. I don't think the Nikon or Hassel scanners are for "production" enviroments to scan hundreds of rolls, just for punctual work.
Ah that makes sense! And for sure bulk/speed isn’t their intended use and they’re definitely both great at what they do, I wasn’t really trying to put one or the other down just wanted to observe and convey what the user experience was like! Thanks for the insight!
Hey man, I really appreciate the work you did on this comparison-I understand the game but very few photogs/scanner operators seem interested in comparing high end/professional tools when new methods and consumer gear generate so many clicks-but the way in which you structured this comparison renders it mostly meaningless. You note in the beginning of the video that you’re scanning color negative and letting the two different scanning software suites handle the inversion because as you state you mean to test both scanner and software but to my knowledge it is impossible to test both at once for color negative film. Flexcolor, nikonscan, vuescan, and silverfast all use different inversion matrices, black/white point setting, etc which means that any difference in color, apparent dynamic range, clip point, etc may-and probably do-come down to software without telling us anything about the quality of the optics and ccd in the hardware itself. These differences are important for lab scanners like Noritsus and Frontiers because the customer is not the scan operator and most technicians will batch convert, which means that the customer is stuck with the scanner’s inbuilt software bias, but one of the benefits of scanning at home is control over these factors.
Of course not all home scan operators will employ more advanced workflows but we should then be explicit about testing different automatic inversion solutions rather than attributing differences in software to differences in hardware, which confuses an already very confusing space. For example, the specular highlights on the thumb in your test picture speak to different white point settings, not a difference in information collected by the scanner. The dMax of color negative film is actually so low that both scanners can easily capture all the information available on it.
A fair, meaningful comparison of the scanner hardware would require either making linear raw scans from each (this is possible in flexcolor through the 3f workflow as you noted but it’s also easily done in both nikonscan and vuescan by choosing raw output) and processing them using the same inversion software (eg negative lab pro or colorperfect) or-even better due to increased inherent dMax-scanning a frame of transparency film in both scanners.
As it stands this video allows us to compare the relative sharpness of each scanner and the quality of their automatic inversions but we cannot draw any conclusions about these scanners’ color capture or dynamic range, ie the “look” of each scanner, which is what I’d imagine most folks are interested in discovering.
Again I appreciate the effort you put into exploring an important but esoteric topic-all of us film photographers should endeavor to become scanner operators as well, as the electronics on noritsus and frontiers will all inevitably fail-but more clarity regarding what you’re testing here (inversion software) and better testing methodology to target what you meant to test (quality differences between scanner hardware) would go a long way toward disambiguating this difficult topic. The scanning space needs a charismatic, knowledgeable presenter like you because right now it’s all old forum posts and enthusiastic amateurs.
(Fwiw I’ve found imacons to have a slight edge in sharpness and an even slighter edge in dMax over Nikon scanners but it takes printing above 24” to even begin to spot a slight difference and even then the difference in dMax only matters for transparencies).
Hi Spencer! Thanks so much for this super thoughtful and kind approach to pointing out some of the failings of this video, you’re definitely correct that the approach wasn’t the most thorough way to test the true limits of each scanner but since the comparison was kind of spur of the moment I figured I’d just see what sort of results one could get with things set up pretty much standard like most users would run the machines as opposed to a thorough comparison in the manner you describe.
Everything you’ve pointed out with regards to technique in order to get comparable results maintaining maximum detail is absolutely correct though, I think I did point out in the video that I was going to use the standard softwares as opposed to workarounds in this test but I would quite like to revisit this topic at some point and set it up in a manner that allows for both scanners to exhibit their maximum potential!
The lab has unfortunately since sold the coolscan though so I’m going to have to wangle access to another one locally sometime haha, but your level headed approach to discussing the failings of this video has got me interested in it again now. I had considered revisiting it soon after the first one but the amount of really mean feedback this video got from people that didn’t actually pay attention to what I pointed out kind of put me off it.
You’ve reignited the interest for sure though so will see what I can do! Thanks again for your kind approach, and really great to receive a comment from someone that very clearly also knows what they’re doing but doesn’t feel a need to lord it above others, hope you have an excellent day!
@@willysheepskin thanks for responding on an older video! I do my scanning on a coolscan atm but am considering an imacon and yr seemingly the only person online who's done a comparison as a working photog with actually interesting work, not just some luminous landscapes guy with a million dollars. I find the digital archaeology required to get good results out of these old scanners really fun and I think a lot of us as artists could benefit from better understanding the process--especially when almost all of our work remains digital nowadays scanning is as close to the darkroom/hand printing as most of it gets so understanding eg color spaces at least for me helps me consider my work for exhibition rather than just shooting it straight into a hard drive. Dslr scanning/NLP is great as an accessible workflow but I think that some videos doing a real deep dive on the nitty gritty of lab quality scanning would be super fresh and helpful and I think you could present that info really well if you ever had the time and interest to do it. There's so much more information and potential for control over the final image in especially color negatives than most folks realize (eg I see loads of blown out skies in NLP scans), especially with so many folks scanning at home nowadays. Sorry to see all the shit feedback--I wish folks were more open to learning and discussing rather than scoring meaningless dunks, especially when there's so much misinformation out there. As an intro I found this vid a super useful jumping off point and I'd love to see a follow up. Hope you have a good one too!
screw image quality, look at the quality of the stache!
Gimme a couple more weeks and we'll be in Tom Selleck town 8-)
Great review! Thank You
Thank you! Glad you enjoyed!
13:30 be careful with Digital Ice : it nothing more than the « Dust and Scratches » filter fine tuned between the radius + threshold. It will blend new pixels together with artifacts and remove fine detail. It’s probably time saving for small prints but you don’t want to use this option for bigger prints or high quality scans. So, The best way to compare both scans is to remove the digital ice option and scan the negative by cleaning it before.
Well now... after spending an enormous amount on the Nikon 9000...used... now I need a Flextight apparently. Sheesh... Kidding, well I'd like one, but as you pointed out, it just doesn't make sense for a hobbyist, though to be fair the 9000 is probably overkill as well.
Haha I reckon the 9000 gets moooore than enough out of a negative for sure - my examples here were just running default software too, so I reckon with enough tinkering and setup the 9000 can have glorious colors, great sharpness and biiig sizes without having to go all the way up to an Imacon, the 9000 is in fact a bunch faster than my 343 for max res scans so it'd be nice to have for that at the very least!
also at 14:38 you missed one advantage of the flextight scan, the skin tone!, it looks a lot warmer, and better than the 'coolscan' one, which looks a little cooler, and for skin maybe a little too blue?
Awesome video as always. I use the vuescan software with my cool scan 9000 and I am happy with the results esp slide film. I think ice reduces the image quality but this could well be user error :)
Thanks Oz! And Ice for sure does have an impact, I kind of wanted to let both scanners act in a manner that would show their best features and compare results that way for this video, when I revisit it I’ll definitely be giving both scanners the best chance to shine
I found a big difference in quality between original software Vuescan which is superior on my Nikon Coolscan 9000, also must faster.
The lab actually suggested I come back sometime and try out all the different software they have for the CoolScan so I would be keen to experience the variations in quality and speed
Hello Again! Hope You are doing well. So recently I came across some guys from Stuttgart Germany who sell, develop and scan Kodak Vision 3 film on a Apollon 14k Scanner. So would like to hear your thought about it. I really loved the negatives they emailed me. If you want I can send you some samples
One of the first things I do when I use a Nikon Coolscan to scan a microscope slide is repeat the scan a few times and make an average (median) scan to filter out random (electronic derived) noise and extend the dynamic range.
Is that a method which photographers use to improve scan quality from these lower-end scanners?
I'm a bit familiar with big Coolscans and recommend to check scanners condition (cleanliness) and software workflow. Original Nikonscan can be a bit annoying in handling but it's the best, you need the knowledge for best settings.
I guess there is not a big difference in quality between flextight and coolscan, maybe in processing speed.
Thumbs up for your comparing!
Glad you enjoyed it! Will for sure be giving both scanners the best opportunity to shine in a future video for a comparison like that as well, and investigate the best coolscan settings haha!
Wow. I was transfixed for the whole thing. I Learned so much.!
I am very glad to hear it! It is quite a long video but the majority of it is actually saying somewhat useful stuff so glad it didn't drag on haha!
How would an Epson b850 compare to the Hasselblad? Thanks for the video, very interesting
Thanks for checking it out! The v850 isn't really even comparable unfortunately, color, size, sharpness etc just aren't there on the flatbeds. It does have digital ice though which means not as many dust issues as the Imacon scanners haha!
Does the Flextight really have a CCD sensor or does it use the more modern CMOS technology? I wish there was a comparo with the lovely Frontiers-my favorite lab scanner.
Yep it's referred to as a CCD in all the manuals and sales documents I've looked at! I can very easily do a color comparison with the frontiers actually - a future video idea!
@@willysheepskin ahhhh okay. You might be aware that some people believe the CCD sensor, a deprecated tech is actually superior to CMOS in its color rendering. I love the look from the Fuji Frontier… certain early Leica digital M cameras have also made true believers out of the CCD.
thanks for the informative video, im looking to get an older imacon (I know they are trouble but I'm potentially getting one for free so that is fine), my teacher has one he doesn't use that he has stayed the wold give me if I cold get it to work, do you have like a list of things that I wold need to do such a thing? have had trouble finding exactly what I need to get! thanks!
can you upload the high res photos?
we have a flextight 848 at my school that i use, one annoying thing that it does is the mask/negative moves slightly when you preview/scan, so you often have to adjust the crop a couple times before you’ve scanned one frame.
do you or someone else who has used this scanner, adjust the colors in the flexcolor program or do you run a completely flat scan and edit afterwards? it can be extremely time consuming adjusting the colors and im wondering what really is the best way of doing it.
Hi. what is Your toughts on epson750 flatbed scanner ? cannot decide should i get one or not , or its complate waste of money and You dont suggest it ? thnx
The knowledge! Thank you!
Is the Hasselblad Flextight X5 can scan film 110 ?
It's a shame they no longer make these (both the Nikon and Flextight). I wish someone would make something equivalent or HB would sell the rights to someone else... Have you tried the "new" Plustek OpticFilm 120 Pro? It seems to have specs quite similar to the Nikon Coolscan 9000ED but can be purchased new. I'd be curious to see output from this but there is next to no information available online.
I have a fantaatic 35mm Kodacgrome 64 slide of Sarel Van Der Merwe's Kreepy Krawly March Porche from 1984 that couldn't have been panned any better. 1/125 and 5.6 with a big long waste gate flame shooting out the back. The background and foregroumd blurred wheel spin blur but the edges of the rims tack sharp as well as the body. I'm only babbling about it because you seem to be a South African. How large a digital file can the 'blad scanner make from a 35mm slide, in megaixels. Enough for a 300dpi A1 print?
The shadows around the thumb are not deep shadows that only a high Dmax scannner would bring up in a transparency(this was a neg....shadow area is a very thin area). It was a matter of the mid tone slider being set differently. As for highlight, likely the same issue with the NIkon 9000, (color negs are not dense, it was your settings, you didn't try to match, nor did you show the histogram, but than you said the lab guy did the setting up for you). I have the Nikon 9000, and you just convinced me the X5 is clearly not worth the money for me(only when time is a factor, like in a lab). Regarding muddiness, you do have to adjust color/brightness...before you make comparisons like that. Your comment that 3200spi is the limit is not true...more closer to 5000 depending on film used. Also, you talk about the benefits of time with the X5, but than you run the Nikon with ICE on. That slows it down a lot. You should have used a transparency, and see how far both dig into the deep shadows, and showed us your settings used. The Imacon is faster to work with, more durable for commercial use, does 4x5 (big deal), does 8000spi for 35mm (wow), is glassless, and great film holders, and has dust removal (not sure if optional). You pay a lot for those benefits. The Nikon will do 617 when stitched, is best with glass carriers by Nikon (with ANR glass), and has ice to rid the dust. I've had labs give me film back with all sort of dirt (dust was not the main problem).....without ICE, a lot of work. Frankly, it is like comparing a Ferrari and a chevy....both get get you there, one is faster, but most of us do not need the speed and prefer the better ride (ICE). I saw no benefit with 120 film (resolution only 3200 on X5). Also I rather scan 612/617 film with the nikon (stitched at 4000spi), rather than the 2040spi (samples per inch for scanners) the X5 does for 4x5/612.
Hi!
Any chance you could get into the details of how to get a Flextight running on a modern computer? I've been offered to lend a Flextight Precision III, if I can get it running!
Doing the research so far it either seems that I need to get a G5 Mac, or a Windows7 computer with a SCSI-interface...
Read something about ONE type of Firewire-adapter that could work, but it was like 300€/$...
Would love to know what gear and cables you are running it on!
If I can't get it to work, the studio that owns it also has a Phase One with a 200mp digital back... So I might end up trying to "Dslr scan" my neg's that way.. But would really like to get the scanner going.
And thank you for an awesome video!
Hi Daniel! You can get a Piii running on a modern machine, but it is actually vaaastly easier to get it going on older software.
I personally built/sourced 5 different machines before I got mine running smoothly! I tried two G5's but they're actually not too great, the G4 is what most people run precisions on and they're quite good at staying connected BUT the G4's are ancient at this point and finding parts can be tricky!
The way I run my scanner is on a dedicated windows XP machine with an Adaptec SCSI card and nothing but flexcolor software on the computer haha! I then transfer files via USB, although I could probably set up a shared folder between it and my Win10 Machine if I wanted to come to think of it!
The X5 in this video does run on a windows7 machine, but the X5 is firewire by default and thus doesn't need that very fallible adapter and getting firewire running properly on newer windows is much easier than a SCSI setup.
My advice would be to source a cheap old XP machine and a scsi card and to never look back haha, I sure haven't!
In terms of comparison to your facilities Phase One setup, I've heard from people that have tried that that sharpness and rendition are very good, but the colors are a real struggle to dial in which is the main benefit of using an Imacon because the color potential is glorious! Takes some practice but there's still nothing out there that comes close to a good Imacon scan in my eyes
Hope that helps! Let me know if you need any clarification!
@@willysheepskin
Thank you soooo much William!
I was just about to buy a G5!
I think I have and old XP-tower somewhere. Or I can try to get my 2010-ish PC to get a partition with XP on it. I also have some Mac Pro 3.1 and 5.1, but I presume these won't work? My friend might have a G4... But I'll gladly take the words of an expert and just start with an XP-build!
Looking at the Adaptec I read many like the Ava-2906 card, would you agree? If so, I guess I'll start with buying one of them!
Yeah, I realized the X5 had FW after I posted! Cnet has this spec-sheet on the PIII that says it has Scsi AND FW, but I realized they must be wrong, right?
I'll gladly skip the whole Phase One project if the colors are better on the PIII. I looked at your website and I will gladly admit that I was alooong time ago I saw such beautiful colors and motives! Really Awesome work!
I'd love to keep you posted, would it be okay if I stalked you on social media instead, and let the convo go on in the DM's?
@@danielabrahamsson5769 That is indeed the correct adaptec card! I found mine as part of an old Jaz drive setup someone was getting rid of here and in spite of it being in questionable condition it still works like a bomb haha! You can buy them cheap on ebay too, and you'll need an hd-50 to hd-50 scsi cable to connect the scanner to it!
I'm actually not very well versed on the Piii so it could in fact have a firewire port, I did think that the entire precision line was scsi but stand to be corrected haha! A few friends run Pii's though and those are definitely only scsi. The iii's seem quite rare around here for some reason.
I'm glad the color work comes across on the site haha! It took a few thousand hours but I'm finally at a point where I can get colors pretty much in line with where I want them and can always go back for revisions if needed lol! The key with Imacons is patience, and research, but you already seem very well versed compared to most who are keen on getting into these dinosaur scanners so I reckon you'll be off to a strong start!
Please feel free to drop me a line on Instagram any time, I respond to messages asap there!
So is it not possible to do full rebate scans with the Hasselblad Flextight X5? I'm thinking probably not because you have to put the film in a holder.
Yes exactly, the holders grip on the rebate!
@@willysheepskin Good to know. Thank you.
Would you buy $4000 Flextight for ebays
I don't understand why nobody is selling a modern, compact scanner that takes 100MP medium format negative scans and about 25MP 35mm scans What more do you really need?. Priced about the same as a semi-pro camera and good reliability. I would give up my own copy-stand dslr scanning setup in a heart beat.
I'd absolutely love if someone came out with a system like that, the demand for even basic home DSLR negative transport systems seems to be high enough that some company could justify designing a modern scanner with nice color and resolution to fill that niche. I guess all we can do is hope for now though, I for one would be very keen on it if the results were satisfactory!
great reference video for the rest of us, but this has given me G.A.S. for one 😞 such a shame dji took Hasselblad over, and they no longer make these, a good product, giving drum scanning to the massess.
I wish there were more competitors and new technology for consumer-grade scanners, including for medium format. Everything is so damn expensive :/
Me too man! This sort of tech is in an interesting place, because it's all just getting older and less reliable but simultaneously more expensive with every new listing. Would be radical if somehow new technology could provide very similar results at a much lower cost
@@willysheepskin I agree. The cost of getting lab scans or getting my own scanner (that's not a flat bed) is the only reason why I haven't gotten into medium format. I was excited for the release of the Plustek 120 Pro, but it's rather pricey and apparently already has some issues out of the box too. Not sure what good options I have to be honest.