>>4308084tested "scanning" with another frame i've already had from the flatbed, and the difference is substantial. like, not even worth the trouble of using the scanner almost, unless there's some settings i haven't figured out yet. nothing i have gotten out of the canoscan looks as clean (in terms of capture, the negs are dirty cause i've been fingering this test roll like crazy lol). previous flatbed scan for comparison
>>4306465. still need to figure out the best way to edit negative images in lightroom or whatever, but quick and dirty pretty good.