Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,665   Posts: 1,481,686   Online: 760
      
Results 1 to 6 of 6
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Thatcham, Berkshire
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    56
    Images
    4

    MEDIUM FORMAT SCANNING - EPSON PERFECTION 4490

    Hi

    I have recently purchased a Mamiya C330f and am planning to use this more than 35mm, hence have just got rid of my Minolta Scan Dual IV.

    Has anybody any experience of the Epson 4490, I dont want to spend a great deal on a scanner as it will only be to upload for evaluation for wet printing purposes and posting on APUG.

    Any comments much appreciated.

    Regards
    Vince
    Vince

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    SE London.
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    585
    Images
    22
    It's perfectly adaquate, but don't expect it to pull out all the detail on the film.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Spain
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    22
    HI.
    I have the Epson 4990, and is very good value for the money.
    I'm very happy with this one, you can see a review, here:
    http://www.photo-i.co.uk/Reviews/int...0/Page%201.htm

    Regards

  4. #4
    jovo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Jacksonville, Florida
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,054
    Images
    176
    Quote Originally Posted by vincedixon View Post
    it will only be to upload for evaluation for wet printing purposes and posting on APUG
    That scanner is more than adequate for your intended purposes. We have and use the 'obsolete' 3200 which is what I've used in the majority of the scans in my gallery here, and which my wife successfully uses to make enlarged digital negatives for an alt process she's pursuing. Scan at 320ppi for your file. It'll be reduced to 72ppi when you save it for the web.
    John Voss

    My Blog

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    South Norfolk, United Kingdom
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,797
    Images
    56
    Quote Originally Posted by jovo View Post
    That scanner is more than adequate for your intended purposes. We have and use the 'obsolete' 3200 which is what I've used in the majority of the scans in my gallery here, and which my wife successfully uses to make enlarged digital negatives for an alt process she's pursuing. Scan at 320ppi for your file. It'll be reduced to 72ppi when you save it for the web.
    The following is something I wrote at the end of last year:

    DPI doesn't mean anything applied to output on a pixel based display device such as a computer monitor or projector. For example: I scan an 8x10 inch negative at 600 DPI producing a 4,800 x 6,000 pixel file. If I set the print output at 300 DPI, the file will produce a 16x20 inch print. However, whatever the DPI is set to, the file is exactly the same on screen. It is still 4,800 x 6,000 pixels in size whether printed at 150 DPI (32x40 inch print) or 600 DPI (8x10 inch print).

    Tom.

  6. #6
    David A. Goldfarb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawai'i
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    17,079
    Images
    20
    We're asking that questions about scanners and digital post-processing be taken to APUG's sister site, hybridphoto.com.
    flickr--http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidagoldfarb/
    Photography (not as up to date as the flickr site)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com/photo
    Academic (Slavic and Comparative Literature)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin