PrimeFilm XAs

Only gave it 4 stars because I wish it were a bit faster but at this price, not gonna happen. I can wish. This was the last model that ran with VueScan on Linux. I have only used Vuescan so far. It takes a while to get used to how this thing behaves. I tested it with Vlad's targets, both a filmstrip and a slide. It eeks out approximately 30 megapixels worth of resolution, so I set the DPI at 4800. The Commercial Noritsu scanner offers approximately 30 megapixels and is very fast and of high quality. However, you'd be hard-pressed to find a used one for under $ 15,000, and you would need training or navigate a significant learning curve. Of course, there is a learning curve with the PrimeFilm XAS as well. One of the interesting factors about this scanner is that the light source is positioned underneath, and the three-line RGB scanning head is positioned above the film. As a result, the emulsion should be facing upward. In Vuescan, I had to tick the 'mirror' checkbox to prevent the image from being reversed. With Vlad's resolution target, I was surprised at how well it worked with the emulsion side down, but note that those targets have a clear base, not an orange one. Here is a scan of a negative short with Royal Gold 400 in July 1994 of an ATK 605. In viewscan I set autolevels and the restore faded setting in VueScan. It works amazingly in spite of my storing negatives rolled up and often not stored on a cool enough environment for longevity.

Este equipo hace lo requerido para realizar digitalizaciones de alta calidad desatendidas, muy buen sistema de autofoco y excelente integración con silverfast.

Unit arrived with bad colors, got a bad test results in front of the tech support. after a while the scanner stopped advancing the film. not recommended!

When it works... it REALLY works. Unfortunately, it rarely works. Pros: • Capable of producing very sharp scans • Theoretically capable of batch scanning • Good color • Focus!!! Both auto and manual Cons: • Slow scanning • Although it can batch scan - the results tend to suffer • Film transport issues • Random visual/optical issues like vertical and horizontal banding - these are inconsistent which is worse in my book • Possible MacOS compatibility issues - or maybe the scanner is just quirky I shoot a combination of 35mm, Medium, and Large format. I bought this scanner, knowing that it wasn't going to help me with the medium or large format, but hoping that it would be something that would help me squeeze the very best possible results from my 35mm work, and sometimes... it did just that. The problem is that the scanner also provided a never-ending string of quirks, inconsistent results, and downright problems. Prior to purchasing this scanner, I scanned with an aging Canon flatbed or occasionally used a digital camera, macro lens, and light table. And this scanner was certainly an upgrade over those tools. When I started using the scanner, I was a bit surprised at how slow and noisy it was compared to my old canon flatbed, but my first roll came out impressively sharp and the colors were better than anything I had ever been able to get before. I never got along with the copy of SilverFast that came with the camera, but I have Vuescan, which works quite well. The problems with this scanner, however, started on day 1. I quickly realized that there was a VERY specific order in which I needed to do things in order to get this scanner to work. I am not sure if this is an issue with MacOS, or with the scanner in general. When I wanted to scan something, I found that I would have to plug the scanner into the computer, power the scanner on, wait for it to warm up, THEN turn on Vuescan (same issue with Silverfast as well). If I did any of these things out of order, the scanner wouldn't be detected by the software. Additionally, any interruption at all would mean that I had to repeat the process, which took around 5 minutes in total on average. This wouldn't have been much of an issue, except the scanner would very often quit in the middle of scanning, and I would have to stop everything and go back to the 5 minute startup process. Batch scanning on this scanner is very well documented, so I won't belabor the point here. Suffice it to say that you can batch scan, but doing so tends to save very little time. Two reasons for this: 1. The scanner is fairly slow, especially at higher resolutions. 2. The film transport is not always super accurate which can throw the entire roll off by a few milimeters per frame... this casscades and causes other issues with everthing from the exposure and color balance, to focus issues, to framing issues, etc. If you value the time that you spend post-processing (and even rescanning) than, it makes a lot more sense to scan frame-by-frame. I have also had weird intermittent issues with banding. The worst tends to be a dark band, approximately 10% of the frame in width, running down the center of my scans. This appears seemingly at random, usually removing the film and rescanning will resolve the issue, but not always. I have had this issue in both Vuescan and Silverfast... sometimes I will scan half of a strip with no issues, then the issue will start happening, and it wont go away no matter what I try. Its particularly problematic, because it is sometimes not very noticeable in the scan itself, but will show up once I apply some contrast in post. There is also some horizontal banding or other digital artifacts that appear from time to time. Usually, this is in the highlights - the more dense parts of the film. I have found that increasing "Analog Gain" in the scan software sometimes helps me overcome the issue, but not always, and often at the expense of the thinner spots in the negative. This is problematic for me because I tend to develop slightly dense negatives for my enlarger's sake. The other BIG issue that I have with the scanner is how it handles curved or curled negatives. If there is even a bit of curvature in the film, it can cause havoc in the scan. The scanner has a very narrow range of focus - so a small variation in distance between the sensor and film due to curvature can cause a HUGE issue with focusing. There are also issues with color or exposure shifts. This is, to an extent, an issue with most scanners, but it is particularly pronounced with the XAs. I have taken to flattening my negatives for 2-3 days after developing to mitigate against the issue. Even still, its a problem. In the end, I got an Epson V850 for my medium and large format work... and honestly, I like it just fine for 35mm as well. The XAs does deliver sharper results and arguably nicer colors... but only when everything is just so. The Epson does a better, and faster job at scanning batches, and although the detail isn't quite as fine as the XAs, it more than makes up for it with consistency. I really wanted to love this scanner, but the juice just isn't worth the squeeze.

If you have good quality slides or negatives the scan quality can be excellent. But I ran into a few issues that run the gambit of annoying to show stopper. Version of Silverfast included doesn’t support Kodachrome with scratch and dust removal. This is a huge deal with old film and a $50+ upgrade. Occasional weird distortion or cropping during scan that requires a lot fiddling with software to get a proper scan. And finally the biggest issue for me. Film strips/rolls must be pretty flat or they jam loading. Rolls are never flat and I gave up trying to load them because they jam every time. I now see why most negative scanners have historically had film strip holders.