But I always expect to touch it up in a photoeditor.
I manage to produce reasonably good color with an Epson 2450 with either color negative or slide film using Vuescan. Medium format generally will be enlarged significantly less than 35 mm, which is what explains the difference.Īs to color casts, that is going to be mainly a matter of the scanning software and how you use it. The Epson 3200 is a good choice for medium and large format since it gives good results at much lower cost than higher quality dedicated medium format film scanners. You might even be able to find a Dual II at an even lower price. The general opinion among those in the know is that at about the same price you would be better off with the Minolta Dual III. The Epson 3200 should do somewhat better in true photographic resolution, but perhaps not by a large amount. I presume you are scanning only 35 mm film since that is what the 2400 is capable of. If anyone has knowledge of the two scanners or knows of some reviewsĬomparing the two, I would love to heard about it. This would be worthĭoing if I knew the 2400 is worth keeping.
Solve the problem using an accurate ICC profile. Scan at 48 bits and remove the cast in Photoshop. Produces scans with a magenta cast to them. Me, this would be more accurate color and sharper images. The main reason I would switch would be for better image quality. If the slightly higher Dmax rating would even be noticeable. None of these features would sway me to buy the 3200 except for the
#Instructions for epson scanner perfection 2400 photo pro
3200 has a Pro model with Monaco and Silverfast Ai 3200 has a bigger transparency scan area From the reviews, the 3200 looks good but I am not sure how it There are plenty of reviews for the 2450 and theģ200. I have looked all over the web but I can't find a reviewįor the 2400. I would do so if I would gain better image I currently own an Epson Perfection 2400 scanner but I am considering
0 kommentar(er)
