Nice video, glad you left in the fumbles! One thing I noticed: you would save yourself a load of time if you used the ISRD (Infrared Smart Removal of Defects) tool in Silverfast. Yes, it doubles the scan time, but you get that back several times over by cutting down spot removal by over 90%.
The Underground was fluorescent lighting, not tungsten. Film always saw a green cast with fluorescent. In the "old days" you would have used a "fluorescent to daylight" correction filter on the lens (which was red/magenta coloured). This was vital when taking slides/transparencies as there was no post taking/correction possible. It is all so easy nowadays!
Let's not forget having to use a color meter and a box of CC gels. Oh, and how about multiple exposures for each differing color temp layer if possible. Or, taping huge daylight to tungsten gels on the outside of the windows to get the color temps to match. This brave new world kinda rocks!
Always nice too see a review by an experienced user proficient with the products features and benefits. Also wouldn’t want to let you handle my negatives! Thanks for the “first use” review though! 😄
Really nice to see a new video from you. I was literally thinking yesterday that you guys haven’t uploaded in some time and I watched an older street POV and now you uploaded :) I‘d really love to see more street pov from you you guys. Also the sponsor annoucement was quite funny xD
I realize that this was posted 2 years ago, but here goes. First off, I am really glad that I bought a Plustek 8200 scanner. It should be arriving in the next few days, and I have thousands of negatives of my own and my brother's to scan. The negative holder looks less fiddley than the one on my Epson V550 flatbed scanner, and it looks a bit sturdier than the Epson one. When i was working in a camera store in the 1980's, they had a blower with a brush, and something that would remove the static that held dust onto negatives. They also had a device that looked like a toy gun that would neutralize static when the trigger was slowly squeezed. You might try finding something like these devices because they work well.
Hi Josh, great new video! I’m using exactly the same set-up. If you press the “isdr” button on the left, silverfast will remove the dust automatically :) Cheers, Jan
The iSRD tool (which you didn't use) in Silverfast will help to reduce dust and other defects during the scan (doesn't work with black and white stocks, however)..
You know, he wouldn't have the hassle he shows when loading the film in the carrier if he turned the film over so the curl was down instead of up. It makes absolutely no difference which way you put the film through the scanner. The Plustek yields about 3000 dpi no matter how high you set the resolution in the software. (Germans are anal about testing this stuff.) However, its buggy software does generate a hugely excessive file, which tends to gull folks into thinking they are getting something which isn't there. The Epson tops out around 2700 dpi, which wouldn't look much different for resolution, but the Epson doesn't have the focus precision of a true film scanner. You can spend thousands setting up some jury-rigged digital camera & macro lens assembly, but the optical limit of the macro lens itself tops that at around 2,700 dpi no matter how large the capacity of the camera sensor may be. Like the Plustek, larger image files are just added artifacts and noise. So get the best true film scanner you can and live with it, or just shoot digital if you want digital files. As for his distress over lack of color saturation and contrast, do not shoot Porta, which is designed to yield low saturation and contrast, for Christ’s sake. The green cast he's pissing over around 10:50 is actually an accurate color. That is what you get when you shoot film under fluorescent lighting, which produces a broken or discontinuous spectrum of light. If you look at the real scene carefully, you can see it, but your mind automatically "filters" what you perceive.
Nice one Josh, I've been down the same road but got rid of Silverfast and Plustek a few years ago as I'm wedded to Nikon Coolscan 5000 ED and Vuescan now, much happier with those. Oh and a Kinetronics StaticVac SV-4400U will help greatly with your dust problems, mine was salvaged from an old Fujifilm Mini-Lab, it's an ion generating antistatic vacuuming thing.
@@nunooliveira4257 hi, the Coolscan is hardware and I have found it to be much better quality than the Plustek and producing better scans, I have no data to back this up only my own judgement of the results obtained from both. Silverfast is software which is very expensive and complicated with a steep learning curve, Vuescan is a bargain and does everything that Silverfast does without the hassle, so suits me just fine.
I always scan with the standard profile in negafix regardless the film. You get the flattest scan and you can then do the job in Lightroom. Also the iSrd for removing dust is definitely worth the extra scanning time.
So glad to hear that you are sponsored by ‘dust’ and not Squarespace. As an aside, haveyou guys got any plans for workshops/ photowalks for when the madness is over?
The 8200i does a fantastic job of scanning but it is a PIA to use. Would be so nice if they would add some kind of auto-feed like the old Pacific Film 1800afl.
Will this scanner work with those fuji disposable cameras that used to be sold at Walmart for like $5, and they would allow for 27 pictures to be taken? They are those 1 time use cameras.
Hello! Any chance you could share a full-size file out of the scanner? Converted to positive ofc. I'd like to compare. I'm looking to sell my medium format gear, stick to 35mm but develop and scan myself. Thanks!
aha I use plustek and exactly the same model as well. I use sliverlight for just colour correction. Also its dust and scratch removal tool is quite good - since I started running the tool (called SRD or something), I hardly ever have to do it manually in the LR.
Hey are going to do a review of canon eos300 ?i am looking for gear and think people would appreciate your reasoning behind why you bough yours and so on. love your photos and i'm exited about your photobook cheers.
The best way to use this scanner, especially for color negative film, is by not relying on the silverfast presets. Scan your negative as a positive and use a standalone editor to invert. I was hopeful for the film stock presets but after using them I find they give shitty results.
Hey mate not sure if it helps but I can see that green cast in the tube photo that you mention you had difficulty correcting. 13:42 You can see there’s no real green cast in the highlights only the shadows. Try using the tone curve and click green only, bring the green shadows down and then bring up the other colours in the shadows if needed. Tone curve saves me so much!
Hi Josh. Couple of questions. First does the Plustek allow you to scan slides? I have found a load of Kodachrome slides my dad took about 40 years ago and want to scan them. Secondly how does it output the file, can you choose, and how much information does it retain for editing it Lightroom compared to say a raw file or jpeg? Thanks
I guess the Silverfast has no shadow or highlight button. I just downloaded Silverfast 9. I will have to bring it into Lightroom to do more adjustments My highend Epson scanner does not do 35mm transparency and negative well. I just bought the same scanner. I have 600 Kodachrome slide that are old family images I have to scan for my sister and it seems this scanner could do a good job faster. I will play with it tomorrow.
@@frame-lines Hey, you know what I found useful? Like others below mentioned your "i" model has iSRD which does an ifrared pass and clears out the dust which helps a lot if you scan a lot (don't try it on a b&w negs though). That's one of my favorite features. The other one is a multi-pass (multi-exposure?) - helps bring up that dynamic range. I also decided that I don't like NegaFix - I turned it off along with Global/Selective CC and just use a neutral point. You can do it once per roll for consistency. Then scan at lowest contrast and do the rest in Lightroom, because, like you said, Silverfast is weird.
I'm relieved to know that it's not just me who struggles with Silverfast. The 8200i has the infrared scan option to automatically remove dust and scratches - have you tried it?
Hi Josh, as I am asking this question 3 years later I am not sure I will get an answer, but I'll try anyway. My question relates to the output format. Plustek allows you to scan into TIFF or JPEG format. I know jpeg is lossy while Tiff is lossless, but does it make sense to scan into TIFF, producing huge files and then changing them into JPG? Does the TIFF file allow us to push / work with the file afterwards in a post-processing software better than the jpg? Thanks a lot for your answer in advance.
You'd get weird artefacts because you'll have to push colors, contrast and saturation a lot further. Better to adjust the scan profile, scan it and only have to slightly adjust it. It's not a digital RAW file that stores all this info like a digital camera.
Hey man, awesome vid, looking forward to buy that scanner now 😁 probably a stupid question but I just got into analog photography, the film you put in your scanner is the film roll you used to shoot right ?
@@dinodemopoulos3336 I now have the answer, you have to get your film roll developed first. It's not that hard to DIY but you got to be careful with the chemicals. I feel kinda stupid looking back at my initial comment ahah so glad if I can save you some time !
My experience with plustek 8200i is 3600 give the max resolution. 7200 gives only a mininmal more resolution but much more file size. Vuescan gives more natural colors, please try.
Scanning 7200 dpi and resizing it to 3600 creates a sharper image than scanning 3600. Only process the negatives that I want to post process in Photoshop with the 7200dpi and once done, resize it to 3600 or 5000 dpi for a smaller and sharper image.
I’ve started scanning my negatives with the Plustek in the past month. I found that Vuescan makes much more sense to use compared to Silverfast and the interface doesn’t look like a big pile of arse... Give Negative Lab Pro a spin on your negatives. I find the colours render much better than developing in either Silverfast and Vuescan.
@@nunooliveira4257 NLP is a plug-in for Lightroom I believe. So it shouldn’t matter what device you scan it with as long as you’ve got a proper negative scan.
Negative lab pro anyone? I used silverfast and it was kinda numbing to do this on a prescan and use the interface, while negative lab pro usually gives me pretty much the best results on all films.
Clean with an Ilford (or some other) static cloth and you won't have to puff the film so much. Also, Silverfast software is crappier than Photoshop, scan with as much of the settings turned off and then edit in a proper software. Cheers!
@@frame-lines It's slow, dusty and expensive but the quality is brilliant. You get the option of scanning in a raw format (.fff) and "developing" the files in FlexColor. The software itself is a blast from the past, but I think you'll find it quite easy to achieve the look you're after. I recommend you try it if you get the chance!
@@frame-lines I don't develop colour at home either, but had lots of fun with black and white. But I don't want to fuss C41 either. I send all the colour film to the lab and let them do the scanning. Seems like it's quite the effort...
I develop color and black and white at home. Never wanted to do color until I found the cinestill 2 bath system. One less step enticed me and I’ve been happy with the result.
I use a Plustek 8100 but as a lifetime _licencee_ of VueScan I much prefer its workflow and detail getting to the fiddly Silverfast. Don't get me wrong, I used Silverfast a lot with other scanners (Epson v750, Minolta 5400) but dropped it in favor of VueScan for consistency across platforms. You know that greedy Silverfast forces you to upgrades with every change of *Operating System* or scanner. I learned more than a decade ago that VueScan is truly *universal.* Then, I don't try to get *perfect* colors on the scan; I drop my 48 bit TIFFs into adobe Camera Raw and adjust them there. If you want the ultimate in resolution, have the plustek do up to 3 passes on the negative; you will be able to define individual grain on ISO 400 films. Since I shoot mainly B&W on film (local labs are extremely sloppy and I don't process my own C41 anymore) I do color mainly with my digital cameras; however, I prefer my TX and HP5+ for streets. My usual hardware are a Leica M2 with a Summicron 35/2 or its digital counterpart a Fuji X100T. Generally the M2 gets me more keepers (per stroll). The Plustek 8000 series are very good and get you the finest film scans for 35mm --something above 3200 dpi *real.* You must know the _claimed_ 6400 dpi are nowhere to be found. Of course, these approach the Minolta 5400 claim (unrealistic) and beat the Epson v700/v800 6200 dpi claim.
Heard scanning it 7200 dpi and resizing back to 3600 creates a sharper image than scanning it directly to 3600 dpi. Does VueScan offer the IR dust removal?
@@ERoossien Yes, if the scanner supports that as well. The 8200 does, the 8100 doesn't. Resizing down from 7200 might sharpen the image a bit but will also extend the scanning times fourfold. Better to do that in photoshop. Search YT for blur tu sharpen in piximperfect channel to do a perfect sharpening.
I think you might be wasting time with Silverfast once you have it scanned in. Silverfast can only do so much with its optics. It can't change the saturation of the scanner or infact the exposure. It can set the resolution but that's about it. If it were me I would scan them in and edit in Lightroom. Or, your preference. One thing about a camera shooting the negative on a light table. You CAN adjust the exposure, saturation, tint, color balance, etc., for REAL. Then you might want to zero it in in LR. But there's only so much the software and your scanner can do. Do you think I'm right? That's where perhaps your 48 bit would come in as opposed to 24 bit. Collect it in 48bit if you can. You don't care about the file size until you get done editing. But you want that dynamic range. I think that 48 bits is better than a camera if I recall. Pixels and dynamic range is what it's all about. Also I remember something about the sensors on a scanner don't use Beyer compression where as a camera does. Someone smarter than I could comment on this. Don't mean to take over or diminish anything you've said but sometimes it's useful to go back to basic principles. Great video and I think I'll buy one of these!
Honestly, after many rolls with SilverFast I've come to actually hate it a bit. It might be OK if you let the software automatically apply settings to your images, but I tend to prefer to have consistency and control over what's actually happening and SilverFast is nowhere close from being "controllable". The moment you disable the "auto settings" checkbox, weird stuff starts to happen with contrast and exposure (i.e. for frames of the same roll and density). Besides, I feel that it's just a piece of software that applies corrections to the scanned files, rather than a software that truly adjusts your scanning hardware settings. Switching to a DSLR seems much simpler and allows non-destructive settings applied in Lightroom directly.
The answer might be in other comments and I apologize for asking before I researched, but were you running this on a Mac? If so how did the Mac behave with it?
Nice video, glad you left in the fumbles! One thing I noticed: you would save yourself a load of time if you used the ISRD (Infrared Smart Removal of Defects) tool in Silverfast. Yes, it doubles the scan time, but you get that back several times over by cutting down spot removal by over 90%.
The Underground was fluorescent lighting, not tungsten. Film always saw a green cast with fluorescent. In the "old days" you would have used a "fluorescent to daylight" correction filter on the lens (which was red/magenta coloured). This was vital when taking slides/transparencies as there was no post taking/correction possible. It is all so easy nowadays!
Technically there was, as when printing by hand you can actually correct the colours on the projector. At least on most of them.
"Especially with slides"
You aren't making prints with slides (at least most of the time
Let's not forget having to use a color meter and a box of CC gels. Oh, and how about multiple exposures for each differing color temp layer if possible. Or, taping huge daylight to tungsten gels on the outside of the windows to get the color temps to match. This brave new world kinda rocks!
Always nice too see a review by an experienced user proficient with the products features and benefits. Also wouldn’t want to let you handle my negatives! Thanks for the “first use” review though! 😄
Really nice to see a new video from you. I was literally thinking yesterday that you guys haven’t uploaded in some time and I watched an older street POV and now you uploaded :) I‘d really love to see more street pov from you you guys. Also the sponsor annoucement was quite funny xD
Aha nice one !
Thank you! I have just purchased this scanner to scan my 35mm films! Not many UA-cam clips give demos of film scanning so thank you!
Great video! That hoop shot is great!
Nice demo, thanks. I'm shopping for a film scanner now. Your video has helped me. :-)
I realize that this was posted 2 years ago, but here goes. First off, I am really glad that I bought a Plustek 8200 scanner. It should be arriving in the next few days, and I have thousands of negatives of my own and my brother's to scan. The negative holder looks less fiddley than the one on my Epson V550 flatbed scanner, and it looks a bit sturdier than the Epson one. When i was working in a camera store in the 1980's, they had a blower with a brush, and something that would remove the static that held dust onto negatives. They also had a device that looked like a toy gun that would neutralize static when the trigger was slowly squeezed. You might try finding something like these devices because they work well.
glad yall are back...been looking forward to it
Ah cheers !!
Shout out to dust! Great video dude loved the commentary and seeing the muddling through work flow. That's real life and I like it.
Ahaha exactly 😅😅
Nice to se more of the process with film! Experimental scanning only last for a certain time before buying something better :)
Endless money pit 😅
Hi Josh, great new video! I’m using exactly the same set-up.
If you press the “isdr” button on the left, silverfast will remove the dust automatically :)
Cheers, Jan
Nice one cheers !
The iSRD tool (which you didn't use) in Silverfast will help to reduce dust and other defects during the scan (doesn't work with black and white stocks, however)..
You're hilarious mate, pleasure watching your vid 👏
The pipette tool works pretty well in silverfast to correct any colour casts, just need a neutral grey area 👌
Excellent tip, cheers Lee
Nik collection pure contrast feature fixes and color corrects pretty amazingly.
The fight with the negative is the highlight of the video
You know, he wouldn't have the hassle he shows when loading the film in the carrier if he turned the film over so the curl was down instead of up. It makes absolutely no difference which way you put the film through the scanner. The Plustek yields about 3000 dpi no matter how high you set the resolution in the software. (Germans are anal about testing this stuff.) However, its buggy software does generate a hugely excessive file, which tends to gull folks into thinking they are getting something which isn't there. The Epson tops out around 2700 dpi, which wouldn't look much different for resolution, but the Epson doesn't have the focus precision of a true film scanner. You can spend thousands setting up some jury-rigged digital camera & macro lens assembly, but the optical limit of the macro lens itself tops that at around 2,700 dpi no matter how large the capacity of the camera sensor may be. Like the Plustek, larger image files are just added artifacts and noise. So get the best true film scanner you can and live with it, or just shoot digital if you want digital files. As for his distress over lack of color saturation and contrast, do not shoot Porta, which is designed to yield low saturation and contrast, for Christ’s sake. The green cast he's pissing over around 10:50 is actually an accurate color. That is what you get when you shoot film under fluorescent lighting, which produces a broken or discontinuous spectrum of light. If you look at the real scene carefully, you can see it, but your mind automatically "filters" what you perceive.
Nice one Josh, I've been down the same road but got rid of Silverfast and Plustek a few years ago as I'm wedded to Nikon Coolscan 5000 ED and Vuescan now, much happier with those. Oh and a Kinetronics StaticVac SV-4400U will help greatly with your dust problems, mine was salvaged from an old Fujifilm Mini-Lab, it's an ion generating antistatic vacuuming thing.
Cheers Stuart, pretty sure the ion generating anti static vacuum thing was what the ghostbusters used ?
@@frame-lines worked for them haha
The Nikon Coolscan 5000 ED is much more expensive. Why do you prefer it compared to the Silverfast (edit: not Silverfast, I meant Plustek)?
@@nunooliveira4257 hi, the Coolscan is hardware and I have found it to be much better quality than the Plustek and producing better scans, I have no data to back this up only my own judgement of the results obtained from both. Silverfast is software which is very expensive and complicated with a steep learning curve, Vuescan is a bargain and does everything that Silverfast does without the hassle, so suits me just fine.
I always scan with the standard profile in negafix regardless the film. You get the flattest scan and you can then do the job in Lightroom. Also the iSrd for removing dust is definitely worth the extra scanning time.
Nice one
Grandeeeee Frank!!!!! Hai un Plustek anche tu?
@@frame-lines The green tint of the photo in the tube is probably from the fluorescent lights.
So glad to hear that you are sponsored by ‘dust’ and not Squarespace. As an aside, haveyou guys got any plans for workshops/ photowalks for when the madness is over?
Cheers John, we did have plans for a meet up or something. Next year at some point maybe ..
Framelines Brilliant! I’ll certainly watch out for that.
The 8200i does a fantastic job of scanning but it is a PIA to use. Would be so nice if they would add some kind of auto-feed like the old Pacific Film 1800afl.
Nice scans !
Are you still using this scanner ? I'd like to see more examples of scans.
Will this scanner work with those fuji disposable cameras that used to be sold at Walmart for like $5, and they would allow for 27 pictures to be taken? They are those 1 time use cameras.
Real world issues .Nice vid .I use a V850. That Plustrek looks very good and compact.
Finally some doing the scans with mac
informative and entertaining - ace
Hello! Any chance you could share a full-size file out of the scanner? Converted to positive ofc. I'd like to compare. I'm looking to sell my medium format gear, stick to 35mm but develop and scan myself. Thanks!
aha I use plustek and exactly the same model as well. I use sliverlight for just colour correction. Also its dust and scratch removal tool is quite good - since I started running the tool (called SRD or something), I hardly ever have to do it manually in the LR.
Good shout Hiro, I need to give that a try - cheers
Can it scan medium format?
Hey are going to do a review of canon eos300 ?i am looking for gear and think people would appreciate your reasoning behind why you bough yours and so on. love your photos and i'm exited about your photobook cheers.
How is the sharpness? compared to dslr
The best way to use this scanner, especially for color negative film, is by not relying on the silverfast presets. Scan your negative as a positive and use a standalone editor to invert. I was hopeful for the film stock presets but after using them I find they give shitty results.
how would you compare the quality to a scan with a digital camera?
Its been a few years since this video are you still using this scanner and would you recommend it still?
This video was hilarious.
Hello, do you know if the Silverfast software works with the latest versions of Mac OSX (Ventura)?
Many thanks !
Hey mate not sure if it helps but I can see that green cast in the tube photo that you mention you had difficulty correcting. 13:42 You can see there’s no real green cast in the highlights only the shadows. Try using the tone curve and click green only, bring the green shadows down and then bring up the other colours in the shadows if needed. Tone curve saves me so much!
Hi Josh. Couple of questions.
First does the Plustek allow you to scan slides? I have found a load of Kodachrome slides my dad took about 40 years ago and want to scan them.
Secondly how does it output the file, can you choose, and how much information does it retain for editing it Lightroom compared to say a raw file or jpeg? Thanks
Sure it does. I have an older version of the Plustek scanner and already that one allows me to scan negative and positive.
I guess the Silverfast has no shadow or highlight button. I just downloaded Silverfast 9. I will have to bring it into Lightroom to do more adjustments My highend Epson scanner does not do 35mm transparency and negative well. I just bought the same scanner. I have 600 Kodachrome slide that are old family images I have to scan for my sister and it seems this scanner could do a good job faster. I will play with it tomorrow.
Is it possible to scan negatives with a plustek 7100 paired with epson software?
Does the Plustek always crop out the film border (where it says Portra 400 for example?) or can you configure that
Yes it crops the borders
Lol this is literally what i'm doing at this very moment. How timely!
Ha excellent
@@frame-lines Hey, you know what I found useful? Like others below mentioned your "i" model has iSRD which does an ifrared pass and clears out the dust which helps a lot if you scan a lot (don't try it on a b&w negs though). That's one of my favorite features. The other one is a multi-pass (multi-exposure?) - helps bring up that dynamic range. I also decided that I don't like NegaFix - I turned it off along with Global/Selective CC and just use a neutral point. You can do it once per roll for consistency. Then scan at lowest contrast and do the rest in Lightroom, because, like you said, Silverfast is weird.
Do you recommend epson 850 pro or plustek (which model) ?
I'm relieved to know that it's not just me who struggles with Silverfast. The 8200i has the infrared scan option to automatically remove dust and scratches - have you tried it?
Lol I clearly have not
Is it possible to scan full frame with black border?
Hi Josh, as I am asking this question 3 years later I am not sure I will get an answer, but I'll try anyway. My question relates to the output format. Plustek allows you to scan into TIFF or JPEG format. I know jpeg is lossy while Tiff is lossless, but does it make sense to scan into TIFF, producing huge files and then changing them into JPG? Does the TIFF file allow us to push / work with the file afterwards in a post-processing software better than the jpg? Thanks a lot for your answer in advance.
Can you comment on the difference in the level of detail between a flatbed and the Plustek? Why not do all the color correction in Lightroom?
You'd get weird artefacts because you'll have to push colors, contrast and saturation a lot further. Better to adjust the scan profile, scan it and only have to slightly adjust it. It's not a digital RAW file that stores all this info like a digital camera.
Hey man, awesome vid, looking forward to buy that scanner now 😁 probably a stupid question but I just got into analog photography, the film you put in your scanner is the film roll you used to shoot right ?
I'm glad you asked this. I had the same question haha. Wonder how it works.
@@dinodemopoulos3336 I now have the answer, you have to get your film roll developed first. It's not that hard to DIY but you got to be careful with the chemicals. I feel kinda stupid looking back at my initial comment ahah so glad if I can save you some time !
Thought the 8200 had a infra red channel which removes dust particles electronically
What do you use for 120?
Should the glossy side on the negative be pointed up or down?
It’s best drop it and see which way it lands
2:50 , This made me laugh!
HAHAHAHA THANKS FOR THIS
“Search: Piece of Shit” 😂 and “for the next 45 mins or so” had me dying. You’ve earned a subscriber in me. Lol cheers
I've heard the software crashes on a mac, have you any thoughts on this please?
Works fine for me
Is this the 8200 se or 8200 ai?
Wanted to know about the scanner not software .
is there any ways to include film borders on plustek scan?
There’s not, the film holder crops out the film borders unfortunately.
it is good, but the D-Max is weaker and the dust cleanup comes short. It leads to lots of cleanup in Photoshop.
Where can I buy Dust?
I might have accidentally subscribed to their services.
My experience with plustek 8200i is 3600 give the max resolution. 7200 gives only a mininmal more resolution but much more file size. Vuescan gives more natural colors, please try.
Scanning 7200 dpi and resizing it to 3600 creates a sharper image than scanning 3600. Only process the negatives that I want to post process in Photoshop with the 7200dpi and once done, resize it to 3600 or 5000 dpi for a smaller and sharper image.
I think you're inserting the film strip the wrong way around - it's meant to be emulsion side down AFAIK. Great video though!
I’ve started scanning my negatives with the Plustek in the past month. I found that Vuescan makes much more sense to use compared to Silverfast and the interface doesn’t look like a big pile of arse...
Give Negative Lab Pro a spin on your negatives. I find the colours render much better than developing in either Silverfast and Vuescan.
Haven’t had much luck with neg lab.. might give vuescan a try though..! Cheers
Can Negative Lab Pro be used with this Silverfast device?
@@nunooliveira4257 NLP is a plug-in for Lightroom I believe. So it shouldn’t matter what device you scan it with as long as you’ve got a proper negative scan.
Negative lab pro anyone? I used silverfast and it was kinda numbing to do this on a prescan and use the interface, while negative lab pro usually gives me pretty much the best results on all films.
Does it have the anti dust removal option?
Clean with an Ilford (or some other) static cloth and you won't have to puff the film so much. Also, Silverfast software is crappier than Photoshop, scan with as much of the settings turned off and then edit in a proper software. Cheers!
Also sponsored by dust? Sweet 😂
Negative Lab Pro makes color correction for film 10x easier i hate using silverfast to correct lol
Have you tried scanning on an Imacon/Hasselblad?
I have not
@@frame-lines It's slow, dusty and expensive but the quality is brilliant. You get the option of scanning in a raw format (.fff) and "developing" the files in FlexColor. The software itself is a blast from the past, but I think you'll find it quite easy to achieve the look you're after. I recommend you try it if you get the chance!
Nikon vs. Plustek please )))
So, do you develop the film yourself as well?
No can’t be arsed
@@frame-lines I don't develop colour at home either, but had lots of fun with black and white. But I don't want to fuss C41 either. I send all the colour film to the lab and let them do the scanning. Seems like it's quite the effort...
It’s all quite a bit of faff eh..!
I develop color and black and white at home. Never wanted to do color until I found the cinestill 2 bath system. One less step enticed me and I’ve been happy with the result.
I use a Plustek 8100 but as a lifetime _licencee_ of VueScan I much prefer its workflow and detail getting to the fiddly Silverfast. Don't get me wrong, I used Silverfast a lot with other scanners (Epson v750, Minolta 5400) but dropped it in favor of VueScan for consistency across platforms. You know that greedy Silverfast forces you to upgrades with every change of *Operating System* or scanner. I learned more than a decade ago that VueScan is truly *universal.* Then, I don't try to get *perfect* colors on the scan; I drop my 48 bit TIFFs into adobe Camera Raw and adjust them there. If you want the ultimate in resolution, have the plustek do up to 3 passes on the negative; you will be able to define individual grain on ISO 400 films. Since I shoot mainly B&W on film (local labs are extremely sloppy and I don't process my own C41 anymore) I do color mainly with my digital cameras; however, I prefer my TX and HP5+ for streets. My usual hardware are a Leica M2 with a Summicron 35/2 or its digital counterpart a Fuji X100T.
Generally the M2 gets me more keepers (per stroll).
The Plustek 8000 series are very good and get you the finest film scans for 35mm --something above 3200 dpi *real.* You must know the _claimed_ 6400 dpi are nowhere to be found. Of course, these approach the Minolta 5400 claim (unrealistic) and beat the Epson v700/v800 6200 dpi claim.
Heard scanning it 7200 dpi and resizing back to 3600 creates a sharper image than scanning it directly to 3600 dpi. Does VueScan offer the IR dust removal?
@@ERoossien Yes, if the scanner supports that as well. The 8200 does, the 8100 doesn't.
Resizing down from 7200 might sharpen the image a bit but will also extend the scanning times fourfold. Better to do that in photoshop. Search YT for blur tu sharpen in piximperfect channel to do a perfect sharpening.
I think you might be wasting time with Silverfast once you have it scanned in. Silverfast can only do so much with its optics. It can't change the saturation of the scanner or infact the exposure. It can set the resolution but that's about it. If it were me I would scan them in and edit in Lightroom. Or, your preference. One thing about a camera shooting the negative on a light table. You CAN adjust the exposure, saturation, tint, color balance, etc., for REAL. Then you might want to zero it in in LR. But there's only so much the software and your scanner can do. Do you think I'm right? That's where perhaps your 48 bit would come in as opposed to 24 bit. Collect it in 48bit if you can. You don't care about the file size until you get done editing. But you want that dynamic range. I think that 48 bits is better than a camera if I recall. Pixels and dynamic range is what it's all about. Also I remember something about the sensors on a scanner don't use Beyer compression where as a camera does. Someone smarter than I could comment on this. Don't mean to take over or diminish anything you've said but sometimes it's useful to go back to basic principles. Great video and I think I'll buy one of these!
hi! i run a channel all about vacuum and vacuum accessories (or as y'all call 'em, "hovers"), can you put me in touch with your sponsor, Dust?
Will do 😜
Anti static darkroom brushes work better at removing dirt and dust vs a blower.
I prefer a greasy fingertip
@@frame-lines me too, never use gloves myself, and I drink and smoke in the darkroom. F it
Honestly, after many rolls with SilverFast I've come to actually hate it a bit. It might be OK if you let the software automatically apply settings to your images, but I tend to prefer to have consistency and control over what's actually happening and SilverFast is nowhere close from being "controllable". The moment you disable the "auto settings" checkbox, weird stuff starts to happen with contrast and exposure (i.e. for frames of the same roll and density). Besides, I feel that it's just a piece of software that applies corrections to the scanned files, rather than a software that truly adjusts your scanning hardware settings. Switching to a DSLR seems much simpler and allows non-destructive settings applied in Lightroom directly.
Who painted them lines lol
What size shoe is the Plustek?
8.5
I searched ebay for "piece of shit" and it didn't look anything like that tool in your hand
The answer might be in other comments and I apologize for asking before I researched, but were you running this on a Mac? If so how did the Mac behave with it?
3:49 😂😂😂
11:02 me visiting europe
Thanks for the review. I own the same scanner. Get Vuescan software, so much better.
haha. such dry british sarcasm.
🤦♀🤦♀
🤣
What a load of tosh!
Very constructive. Thank you x
Not bad, but the quality of your film shots is uninspiring at the best.