 David S. Tivin |
film scanner beginner What do you guys feel is the best(budget-minded) setup for a film scanner. I am interested in the computer system requirements. Also for starters would a flatbed be a good idea to get me started (I hear the Epson's win)?
|
|
|
|
||
|
doug Nelson |
Unless you or the kids have your hard drive cluttered with MP3's and games, you probably have enough hard drive space. Defragment the hard drive once in a while. You need lots of RAM, as much as you can put in, 256 MB as a minimum. Fortunately, RAM is cheap. My system works OK with a Pentium III and a 450 processor, so don't sweat speed. People here like the Epson 2450 flatbed. It's especially good for scanning medium format negs, and usable with 35-mm. If all you do is 35, consider Nikon, Canon, Minolta, Pacific Image, Kodak, and Microtec film scanners. $500 is a minimum, however. They are complex, delicate pieces of gear, so don't buy used.
|
|
|
|
||
|
David S. Tivin |
Hey thanks for the response. What about computer monitors? I've read a lot about having to callibrate them to be more accurate. Is there a minimum dot pitch I should consider? Any feelings? Also is the Epson 2450 as good for negs as it is color prints?
|
|
|
|
||
|
doug Nelson |
Somehow the figure 25 sticks in my mind for a monitor's dot pitch. I don't think a major computer maker these days would sell you a computer monitor as part of a package that doesn't meet minimum graphic standards. Tell the computer company, such as Dell, or the store, that you want a graphics card and monitor that are graphics quality. Search down this QandA thread and you will see some comments from satisfied Epson 2450 users. Also search back issues of Shutterbug for a glowing review of this scanner. Before I'd spend $400 for a flatbed, I'd consider the Pacific Image or least expensive Canon film scanners for $500. 35-mm is a very tiny neg that demands a lot of a scanner.
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||