Whirlpool

Hi,

The missus is wanting to get her hands on a decent scanner to convert a lot of her old film photos into digital format. She's got a few negatives in there too.

Just wondering what in a scanner one should be looking for? As its a big job and something that you'd want to do RIGHT the first time – I'm happy to spend a little on it – though nothing silly.

User friendly, with good results without messing around would be great. All photos will be colour stock. I'm not sure if using a really high resolution level is needed as all photos will have been shot with very basic 35mm cameras and also would have used basic corner store type film stock!

Looks like Epson's are very highly regarded, also a few of the Canons. Though from what I've read the Epson V700, V500 and V350 are probably best – mixed reviews on the Canon 8800F. Or maybe a smaller one of the Epson Perfection series?

No real benefit to getting a dedicated negative scanner? I mean unless you're spending big $$$ that is......and I'd imagine they'd really only show worthwhile benefits if your negatives were shot with high quality cameras on high end film stock?

Welcome suggestions on good units or features that one should have- well below $500 would be ideal.

Please match the suggestions to what I need it for – as while I know Nikon CoolScan/Minolta's are the best – they're complete overkill for the quality of the material I have to process.

My main concern is getting something great eg Epson V700 but its overkill for my very basic photos and negatives....

Much thanks, Nick

I use an Epson 3590 and I'm happy with it.

Forget $500 flatbed scanners, unless you are a professional (and have firm opinions).

The HP HP Photosmart C8180 ~$400 (~$250 after cashback)beats everything as an all-rounder for the old & new amateur photographer. It scans negs & slides has DVD burner, card readers -with USB or wifi connection too.
http://computershopper.com/reviews/hp-photosmart-c8180-printer-review

The NEARLY finished HP cashback deal would make you VERY happy.
http://h50025.www5.hp.com/ENP5/Public/Content.aspx?contentID=24274&portalID=367&pageID=1
Do not stuff around, comparing and wondering if a flatbed would be better dude. The offer ends 31 August 2008.

Ah cool – as I was REALLY thinking that with the basic Mum & Dad 35mm stuff we have from our childhood that it'd be wasted getting a $500 or so unit.

I mean kinda made sense on all levels but you don't want to cut corners on something so labour intensive and important.

Will have a good hard look at the HP's.

So you're very much of the mindset that these smaller size dedicated photo scanners are better than the flatbeds that also do photos, negatives as part of their feature set?

Epson's have gotten really good writeups all over where I've read – and will google the HP.....not sure how they rack up asgainst each other.

Not sure with HP's equivalent of Epsons Digital Ice is – as it sounds excellent for dust and scratch correction, which will be a real factor I'd imagine.

Am a bit concerned about the wifi, dvd burner etc stuff – as to the frank I don't need that kinda frills – really just want best image reproduction for the pricepoint.

Seems to be some talk that using 3rd part scanning software such as SilverFast or VueScan is better than the makers stuff that comes with it – any merit to that?

Much thanks for your opinions.

:-)

PS Hmm that HP is a big all in one sucker........not really a great fit for my needs and I just haven't the room etc and I'd never use the printing functions of it and all the other frills.

Will look into it more though. Any reason why you feel it performs better than the Epsons v500, V350? Or do you just like the value bundle – which I can understand.

Having read up on the HP 8180 it doesn't get great results on its scanning of photos nor negatives – its does well, especially for an AIO unit but I don't think that it'd match up to an Epson V3500 or V500 very well.

Prolly pass on it but open to others....I really don't want an AIO unit – the printing just isn't needed.

I think you'll find the decent flatbed scanners are big suckers also and more expensive than my suggestion the HP C8180 or Canon MP970.
I don't print my own photos much, but I do I'm very pleased with the results. The Epson V500 sounds fine for what it is -anyhow good luck.

Goshy writes...

I think you'll find the decent flatbed scanners are big suckers also and more expensive than my suggestion the HP C8180 or Canon MP970.

I'm sure they're not small – but think they'd be a bit smaller.

I appreciate your suggestions and think they're great value for all-rounder but from the limited in depth reviews on them it appears the scanning results are below those of dedicated photo scanners.

Good tip though> :-)