>>4146285My experience with the Plustek-Scanner has been consistently negative:
I was looking for an inexpensive way to digitize all my slides and negatives, but had to realize, however, that the device is much too slow for large quantities and can only be loaded with relative difficulty, and I never got a handle on the color space profile in underexposed shots.
I also always had problems when the slide wasn't completely flat, but had slightly rippled over the years in the frame without glass.
I thought the side dust protection flaps were a good idea, until I realized after a while that they are actually supposed to protect against dust from the outside, but then more protect the dust inside!
I have no way of getting decent access to the inside of the optics to clean them without completely disassembling the entire device.
It was very frustrating!
Now I use a slide copy attachment with a bellows extension for my SLR with a macro lens, which is significantly faster and I have more options for intervention.
It was a lot more expensive to buy, but in terms of quantity, the cost per scanned photo is just about 2 cents per picture.
Together with the significant time savings and the better results, this is very acceptable to me.
Ultimately, with the resolution of the SLR, even with ASA 100, you can now see the grain of the film more than the pixels.
With the Ectachrome 400 I mostly use, interesting effects result from the coarser film grain. I like this.
