I am going to post a set of comparisons.

This first set is an incomplete test since the scans in the Epson holder were made with the stock Epson Scan software from my V 800 scanner and those made from the Lomography holder were scanned with Silverfast 9.

I always struggle to get the film flat in the Epson holders. The only way to lay it flat is to wrestle the film under the extrusions on both sides of the plate. But doing so is nigh on impossible, so I just rest the film on top of them. If Epson would only make the spacing between these fingers and the plate more forgiving, flatness would be much easier.

The Lomography holder fits the entire sheet of film easily allowing me to scan the edges with film data, especially handy for the Pentax 645NII film imprints.

The film used here, Kodak TriX, dried very flat. The experience with curled film is still in doubt for the Lomography holder, but one of the variables from the Lomography scans, be it the holder or the software, obviously leads to much better scans – and it is not even close.

The first image is from the Epson holder, Epson software. The bottom image is the Lomo holder and Silverfast.

Next I will post images shot using the Lomography holder and the two software packages for a more direct comparison.

Sorry for the inconsistent orientation.

Pentax 645@200
Pentax 645@200

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: