Anybody had any positive experiences with slide scanners.

I just bought an Ion Slides 2PC USB scanner which is able to scan slides and negatives at up to 17MP but it uses Arcsoft Photoimpression 6 for capturing the images and appears to have no way of adjusting the exposure (and it always over exposes).

I've just been given over 1000 slides from my father-in-law, including lots of shots from the 60s, 70s and 80s which appear to be in good condition. I was getting quite excited over the microstock sales implications, but the scanner has proved to be a big disappointment.

Any input greatly appreciated.

EDIT: my reply is to Jimi King.

Never buy toy scanners, like yours.

Flatbed scanners, I can recommend Epson 4490, Epson 3200 and I believe even the newer V500. My 4490 allows me to scan @ 4800 DPI and comes with good software. Being flatbed it is a bit soft, although once you have finished processing you can add some sharpening.

Or get a Nikon 35mm dedicated scanner. They are even better although on the harsh side due to their light source, which somehow makes some photos look worse. I do prefer my Epsons over my Nikon. Software is better too. I have also tried Vuescan and it is not any better than Epson software.

My favourite scanner, so far, is the Epson 4490. Once you learn the art of scanning, which is not as easy as they would like you to believe (never ever use auto mode), you get quite decent scans.

I am ruling out drum scanners as they are on a completely different level.

I also advice not to use the anti-dust anti-scratch infrared scan, as you will get less details in your photos and lots of silly artefacts. If you want a good job you have to do it the hard way: brush the dust off your film and scanner, then scan, then remove any spots in photoshop. It might take hours for each single photo although, to me, it is well worth it, considering film colour and exposure latitude.

Also, if you happen to scan large format film, as I do, there aren't any digital cameras of that size and resolution, yet.

Wow, thanks for the fast responses.

I guess that Maplins can have their junk back and it's an Epson 4490 for me then. Doesn't seem worth paying double for a V700 when I don't have much use for a scanner these days other than the new acquisition of slides. Also, a lot of the slides are indeed Kodachrome.

I already have a perfectly good (although fairly old now) HP Scanjet 4200, but it doesn't have a slide attachment.

Another question. Any recommendations for the best places for selling editorial images, since many of these slides have people in them. I've also got for instance a great shot of London's Piccadilly Circus at night from some time in the 70's. Including the famous Coke sign. I would have thought that the editorial value of that would be quite good.

Quite a few London tourist sites too, with 70s cars in them.

From reading around here it seems that Shutterstock is best for editorial. That so?

Another question. Any recommendations for the best places for selling editorial images, since many of these slides have people in them. I've also got for instance a great shot of London's Piccadilly Circus at night from some time in the 70's. Including the famous Coke sign. I would have thought that the editorial value of that would be quite good.

Quite a few London tourist sites too, with 70s cars in them.

From reading around here it seems that Shutterstock is best for editorial. That so?

Alamy is the right place for those. They are also less fuzzy than microstock in regards to digital perfection.

Regarding Kodachrome, I know many people state they are difficult to scan, but maybe they mean with the anti dust/scratch infrared function, which one shoud not use anyway. I did not have any issues with Kodachrome and I don't know what these people with issues are doing to get bad results with them. I scan expired film, self developed in expired chemicals, with cross colour issues, and I do get away with it. Scanning is a job you have to learn, like anything else.

As per the anti-flatbed scanner party, of course they are not drum scanners but please consider they use modern CCDs and Epson 4490 has a moving light in the lid, nothing to do with the prehistoric models you lot must have been using in the past. You can also do wet mount, if you like.

For what I read in many places, it all depends for the usage you want. 

For microstock and their obsession for perfectectly sharp and noise-free images, I think it would seldom work, even from a film scanner like mine.  I have only one scanned image in microstock, intentionally reduced to about 2MPix in IS - at that resolution, nothing is a problem.

For Alamy, with their minimum requirements, I believe grain would not be a big issue, but lens quality would.  I was surprised when I started to scan slides with the Minolta (3200dpi) and discovered flaws in some cases that would be even worse in the resolution required by Alamy (4000dpi, I think). 

I ran my tests with flatbed scanners about 2 years ago.  I used a HP flatbed with slide mount adaptor we had at work, a top-of-the-line model by then.  Not good.  Also had some slides scanned in an image bureau.  Not good either.  Scans looked great at screen size view, but when you checked them at 100% zoom, things were ugly.  Of course, this may have improved, but from what I read you need special devices to make it work well.

It is important also to have a very high dynamic range, something older models lacked, even my Photosmart (this was one of the drivers that made me upgrade).  I don't know if this was improved in flatbeds as well.

I think however that the work involved in scanning, editing, adjusting, cleaning, etc, is not worth the time, especially for microstock.

Regards,
Adelaide

I think the Imacon is very good probably the best you will find without going to a drum scanner. I have the 848 and it does film up to 4x5.

Best,
AVAVA

All sorts really. Kodachrome, Agfa, Fuji, you name it, they're all pretty much there. There's all sorts of stuff (probably a couple of thousand slides actually, but a lot of those are family shots) which seem to have stood the test of time as they were all boxed and stored.

I bit the bullet and went for the Epson 4490, which arrived a couple of hours ago. It seemed to be the best idea price wise, as I don't know what the potential is of these shots. I'm assuming if one scans at max resolution and then downsizes to 4MP it should stand the test most places.

I'm still interested to hear from anyone with experience where the best places for editorial are. As there are, as I mentioned yesterday, a quite a few shots from the 60s, 70s & 80s with people in them. Not to mention cars from the time etc.

As I said yesterday

Jimi,

Take a look at what is already available on these subjects.  Maybe these old subjects can find a better chance in the RM world than in RF, especially microstock RF. 

Regards,
Adelaide

Thanks everybody. Tried a few scans today. I can see there's quite a bit of work ahead.