Edit Expertise: Scan Duo

The Microtek ScanMaker 1000XL features a TMA attachment that turns the top of the scanner into a light source for slides and transparencies.

Flatbed scanners have been improving at a brisk pace for the past several years, so much so that their ability to scan slides — formerly a considerable weakness — is now closing in on dedicated slide scanners. This is good news because most of the manufacturers like Konica Minolta and Polaroid have discontinued their slide scanner products due to the rapid transition from film to digital acquisition in consumer and professional photography alike.

There are both drum-type and flatbed professional scanners, but these are in the $10,000 to $100,000 range for prepress- and museum-quality archiving use. A flatbed scanner such as the Kodak Creo EverSmart at around $11,000 has an optical resolution of approximately 5600dpi, while some drum scanners achieve up to 14,000dpi. The Microtek flatbed we'll be looking at costs $2,300 ($2,100 with mail-in rebate), and it gives 80 percent of the quality of a much more expensive scanner when scanning reflective (opaque) art. However, prosumer scanners are improving rapidly, and by the end of 2007, expect to see innovative designs that greatly improve transparency scanning on flatbeds costing less than $600.

Until the ultimate scanner is born, combining the individual advantages of a dedicated transparency scanner and a flatbed scanner will best meet your professional scanning needs. But before looking at the offerings from Nikon and Microtek, here are some general things you need to know when choosing a scanner:

Resolution: When choosing a scanner, only consider the optical scanning resolution and not the interpolated resolution (for example: 2400×4800). The first number is almost always the optical resolution. The interpolated number is simply software upscaling, similar to what you can do in Adobe Photoshop.

Sweet spot: Flatbed scanners generally have more resolution in the center of the total scanning area than at the edges. Manufacturers don't tell you how the optical resolution was calculated (is it only the center “sweet spot” or an average across the entire scanning surface?), so be skeptical of published specifications.

Dmax to Dmin: This is the density range of the scanner based on a 0.0 to 4.0 logarithmic scale or 100-percent white to 100-percent black. Fujichrome Velvia, a film with a wide dynamic range noted for its rich blacks, has an approximate density range of 0.3 to 3.8. A scanner with a wide density range will reproduce the whitest whites and the blackest blacks of the source material. The problem with scanner manufacturers' published density range specs is that they are not held to any standard. The specs can be improved by accepting noise (generated by the CCD sensors) in the image, but the signal-to-noise ratio is not published.

Software: While the unprocessed scan is the basis on which scanner hardware is evaluated, good Adobe Photoshop skills can make up for some of the limitations in a scanner. All scanners come with their own scanning software, which allows you to do many of the processes you can do in Photoshop. The advantage of pre-processing the scan is that there is no loss due to rounding error in the software. However, because most scanners now provide 16-bit and 48-bit sampling, the danger of image degradation in Photoshop is usually below human perception.

Windows and OS X
USB
www.microtek.com
Price: $2,100

The ScanMaker 1000XL is a large-document scanner (12"×17" scan bed). It claims a 3200ppi optical scanning resolution, which is at the low end of what prepress considers acceptable, but at the high end of prosumer scanners. Slides and transparencies can be scanned when the top of the 1000XL is replaced with a light source attachment.

The 1000XL is bundled with Microtek ScanWizard Pro and LaserSoft SilverFast Ai software, which both easily installed on my Apple Power Mac G5. Also included is a calibration CD and two color transparencies that are similar to color bars in video — important tools for anyone using the scanner for material that will be sent to a printer. Typically, the scanner and display monitor should be calibrated to ICC standards.

One of the more underrated aspects of scanning is how source work is held on the scanning bed. Because it is not unusual to be scanning older material that has curled, keeping this kind of material flat and within the fixed critical focus area of the scanning optics can be a challenge. Like all manufacturers, Microtek provides plastic holders for 35mm slides and 120, 220, and 4×5 film. When I found some 90-year-old negatives that were slightly smaller than 4×5, I placed them in the plastic holder and held one corner down with a penny. This kind of cobbling is typical in restoration work.

Cobbling aside, the Microtek is easy to use, but quality takes time. A print scanned at 48-bit color can take several minutes to scan, and using the incorporated Kodak Digital ICE technology (explained in detail later) significantly increases scanning time. When using the ScanWizard Pro software, I found that with big scans (more than 150MB), the progress bar would stall at the halfway point even though the scanning continued without problems. Otherwise, ScanWizard Pro worked without a hitch and offered many color- and gamma-correction tools.

One of the best features of the 1000XL is the ability to batch scan source material. The only limitation is that transparency and prints cannot be scanned simultaneously. However, a 35mm slide, 4×5 negative, and a strip of negative can be scanned at the same time, each with its own correction, scan resolution, and output. For example, you can scan up to 12 slides by first scanning an Overview. Then, you draw the marquis selector and select New for each slide. This treats each slide individually with unique settings. You can then select Preview, and if everything looks good, do a full scan.

There is also a Context feature that lets you save a template for individual or batch scans. For instance, if you have hundreds of negatives from a studio shoot, or if you have to create a web gallery from hundreds of slides, you can save the specifications for the input and output, including naming conventions that are serialized. Just load up the slides and let her rip.

But be forewarned: Loading slides with the 1000XL is very different than loading up slides on your $299 printer, in which you could select the entire scanning area and later “cut” up this uber scan in Photoshop. That approach only allocates a small amount of resolution to each image. The 1000XL scans each slide individually using the full resolution available for the scanned area. My one issue with all these capabilities is that ScanWizard Pro saves images as TIFF files unless you open the scanner from within Photoshop. Fortunately, Microtek installs a Photoshop plug-in along with the standalone ScanWizard Pro software.

Windows and OS X
www.kodak.com
Free with Nikon and Microtek

Digital ICE (Image Correction and Enhancement) is a Kodak technology that was developed by Austin, Texas-based Applied Science Fiction (Epson has an equity position in the company). It's a software and hardware system that uses an infrared light source during the scan so that dust and dirt is recorded on a separate channel from the three RGB channels. The IR channel creates a defect map that automatically removes hundreds of dust specks and scratches that would otherwise need to be cleaned up in Photoshop.

While Digital ICE can remove the black or white specs caused by dust, dirt, stains, and fibers that appear on slides even after you have hit them with a blast of air, like most automated software, Digital ICE can also inadvertently affect areas of the image that you want to preserve. Overall, when used with the highest-quality settings for the rest of the scanning process, it produces good results. There is some loss of detail, but by compensating with the UnSharp Mask and not printing above 16"×20", this is a manageable issue. There are other auto-correction tools in the Digital ICE suite, including Digital ROC (Restoration of Color) and Digital DEE (Digital Exposure Extension), but most serious photographers avoid these, preferring to manually correct images in Photoshop. I happen to agree with this approach.

The Nikon Super CoolScan 5000 ED features the Nikon Electronic Format (NEF), which saves an uncorrected version of a scan in addition to all the adjustments made in the scanning software.

Windows and OS X
USB
www.nikon.com
Price: $1,000

The Nikon CoolScan line has been the scanners of choice for prosumers and professional photographers looking for an affordable way to get their images into the computer. “Affordable” meaning between $1,000 and $2,000 — the respective price of the 35mm CoolScan 5000 or the 9000 that also scans 120 and 220 films.

Both the 5000 and 9000 scan at a true optical resolution of 4000dpi, higher than any flatbed that is even close to their price range. The Nikon was easy to set up on my G5, and like most scanners today, Nikon's scanning software is a standalone app, but it also installs a plug-in for Photoshop. Used as a standalone, it saves files as TIFFs. This means you'll have to save another version in Photoshop if you do further corrections — and who doesn't?

The Nikon scanning software is certainly usable, but I'd rather scan using SilverScan Ai for its more sophisticated tools, but with one exception: the Nikon Electronic Format (NEF). This is Nikon's proprietary equivalent to a RAW image format and is used by Nikon digital cameras. The CoolScan can save to both TIFF and NEF. The advantage of NEF is that it saves an uncorrected version of the scan in addition to all the adjustments made in Nikon's scanning software. This means that despite using correction, you can go back to the original NEF scan and remove any correction, thereby getting what is essentially a clean scan.

If you have well-exposed scans with a limited dynamic range, a flatbed scanner might produce good scans, albeit, at a lower optical resolution than the CoolScan (that may change soon). But what about slides or negatives with troublesome shadow areas? Basically, the CoolScan offers three options for lifting shadow areas. The first is through the use of Curves in the scanning software. The second choice is Digital DEE, a software solution that is similar to the Shadow/Highlight tool in Photoshop. Lastly, you have the hardware-based Analog Gain on the CoolScan. This gives you Master and RGB control over the scanner's LED light sources. Theoretically, using Analog Gain would allow me to bracket multiple scans and place them on separate Photoshop layers (the poor man's HDRI), which is useful for images that have troublesome shadow areas. In reality, using Analog Gain reveals less grain than Photoshop's Shadow/Highlight feature when raising the shadow areas, but it's limited to about two stops. This produces less lift than Photoshop's solution. Another issue when using Analog Gain is flare. When Analog Gain is used, light tends to bleed into dark areas of the scan.

A few hours of comparative testing leads me to the conclusion that judicious and subtle use of curves in conjunction with Analog Gain will produce the best results with underexposure or shadow areas that look better in the slide than in the scan. Additional work with masks in Photoshop and selective correction will complete the process even without using multiple scans. However, no matter what method or combination of techniques you are using, pulling up dark areas will increase the visibility of grain.

The CoolScan 5000 has a single slide tray and a multiple negative tray that holds a five-image 35mm negative strip. There is also the infamous Nikon SF-210 auto-slide feeder (purchased separately), an accessory specifically designed for use with the CoolScan 5000, which can scan batches of up to 50 mounted slides. On photography blogs, the SF-210 takes a lot of hits for its tendency to jam. I have no experience using the SF-210, but I was surprised to see that it costs about half as much as the CoolScan itself. Buying the SF-210 for batching makes sense for use in controlled studio shoots where scanner settings can be applied to many slides at the same time.

I was able to get good results using the CoolScan on some difficult slides, but be forewarned: A slide will always look better projected or viewed on a light box than when viewed on a video display or converted to print. This disparity may account for the user's perception that the scanner in not reproducing the full tonal scale of the image.

The Microtek ScanMaker 1000XL and the Nikon Super CoolScan are both excellent scanners for film or video production, as well as for capturing images that can be displayed at up to at least 16"×20".

The 1000XL is pricey when compared to other impressive consumer scanners on the market, but it does have a large scanning bed, and many users will find its 3200 optical resolution on slides to be suitable for their professional needs. The CoolScan adds close to 25-percent more resolution and cleaner optics than any flatbed scanner I've seen, resulting in the higher price tag. So if you need a large flatbed scanner and the extra quality of a dedicated transparency scanner, you will have to spend close to $3,000.

People tend to judge scanners by how they handle slides, negatives, and prints that are faded, damaged, dirty, or poorly exposed. Digital ICE is one tool to help with this, but the truth is that Photoshop cleanup is inevitable — and time consuming. The 1000XL for prints and the CoolScan for transparencies will produce the basic raw material for most of your professional scanning needs. Or, you can spend $15 to $30 per drum scan at a service bureau and still have some problems to clean up.

Scanning software looks a lot like Adobe Photoshop. So, why pre-determine your corrections when scanning instead of processing the scanned file later on? When you correct with scanning software, you are actually making changes in the electronics. This applies correction internally at a high sampling rate that theoretically limits degradation. When correcting in Photoshop, you are working on a bit-map, and corrections, due to rounding errors, will degrade the image. Before the introduction of higher than 8-bit scans, this might have been a noticeable issue depending on the image and degree of correction. Today, however, it makes sense to take the time to scan at the highest possible sampling rate, resulting in near-invisible post processing in Photoshop.

Inevitably, though, the artist's Photoshop technique is a bigger factor than the modest difference between pre-scan correction and post-scan correction. The one exception is the Analog Gain feature of the Nikon Super CoolScan line, which boosts the light output (as mentioned in the main article). This is a true hardware solution and offers results that are difficult to match in Photoshop. It may be a subtle difference, but worth noting.

To comment on this article, email the
Digital Content Producer
staff at
feedback@digitalcontentproducer.com.