Negative holders for the Epson 3200 Photo
N Miller
Photo? If they're a real improvement over the latter I might consider getting
one, price be damned.
Norman Miller
Dmitry Rybas
with 2450.
The difference is that with 2450's holder you slide the film in, with 3200
you put the film on and then snap down by plastic fixture.
For flat film strips, though, there is no difference except loading 2450's
is faster. For curled strips, 3200 holds them better, especially on the
edges, but inserting curled strip without wearing, say, cotton glooves is
hardly possible and a bit tricky, thus taking time to load a strip.
3200's holder feels more fragile than 2450's
So I would say 3200's film holder is improvement if your film strips are
curled but it requires glooves to be worn for curled strips.
Flat strips are of no difference which holder to use.
All the above is for 35mm holders, dunno if convinience is the same for
medium format
"N Miller" <nmi...@trincoll.edu> wrote in message
news:3F1425B3...@trincoll.edu...
Andrew Price
wrote:
>From my point of view, new holder is step down from what has been supplied
>with 2450.
I fully agree.
[---]
>3200's holder feels more fragile than 2450's
To such an extent that I handle mine with a great deal of care. If it
ever breaks, a replacement will only ever be available directly from
Epson, never from the local dealer, and I'm sure it'll cost an arm and
a leg.
>So I would say 3200's film holder is improvement if your film strips are
>curled but it requires glooves to be worn for curled strips.
>
>Flat strips are of no difference which holder to use.
>
>All the above is for 35mm holders, dunno if convinience is the same for
>medium format
The differences you describe apply equally for medium format film, in
my view.
faneuil
Can't you just place on the scan bed?
Eric
"Andrew Price" <ajp...@free.fr> wrote in message
news:h8k8hvc6pnv8u57kd...@4ax.com...
Dmitry Rybas
http://www.normankoren.com/Tutorials/Epson_flatbeds.html#Focus_spacing
+++
To my great surprise I found that both transparency film and reflective copy
are in sharpest focus if they are between 1/16" and 1/8" above the glass!
+++
So, placing film into the holder provides better focus than placing directly
to the glass.
"faneuil" <dontdar...@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:mn_Qa.14272$G%5.6...@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
Bart van der Wolf
"Dmitry Rybas" <dmi...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:bf2vr3$1i1u$1...@news.demos.su...
SNIP
> So, placing film into the holder provides better focus than placing
directly
> to the glass.
Yes, that's my experience with the 2450 as well.
It also avoids the risk of interference between the film and glass surfaces
(unless you'd wet-mount).
Bart
Leonard Evens
Others have indicated that the main difference is that the 3200 holders
snap down. I use mine to scan medium and large format. The fact that
the new holders hold the film on all four sides leads to flatter film,
so it is an advantage. 4 x 5 film stays relatively flat because it is
so thick, but 120 film tends to curve without adequate support.
The first film holder that came with my 3200 was a bit warped and didn't
lie flat on the glass. The amount of play was probably not significant
as far as change of focus was concerned, but I called Epson and they
sent me a new holder which lies much flatter. I didn't have similar
problems with the 2450 I used to have, so it is possible the newer film
holders are not as well made. I suspect, however, that it was the
attempt to include the snapping feature that led to this problem.
Although the film holders provided with the 2450 and 3200 are convenient
to use, one can always make one's own film holders and design them to
accomplish whatever is important to you. All you need is some sheet
plastic (obtainable at a hobby shop), an Exacto knife, some glue, and
some ingenuity.
One suggestion was to use magnetic sheets. I got some at Office Depot
which were just about the right thickness, but my first attempt to
fashion a film holder was not very successful.