>>4513283Own scan, with a DSLR. I tried on the Epson first and it couldn't cope at all. Previews were all black, and when adjusting manually before scanning there was a tiny sliver of tones taking up about 1/20th of the histogram. After limiting range to just that I'd get a hilariously bad image with maybe 6 tones tops in it.
I haven't tried on the Plustek yet but it's currently buried under a bunch of shit in the closet and I feel too lazy to dig it up now.
Here's one more. Like I said, polishing a turd. With enough effort it can maybe be sculpted into something passable, but it's just not good and it's extremely unfun to deal with. Could be made better with masking and adjusting each distinct area separately, but God knows I'm not doing that. If I need to put more effort into editing b&w than a basic S-curve, then it's a bad negative. So here it's a choice of which range of tones is important to show something, and which will become muddy flat shit. It's contrasty and hardly panchromatic, but not in a good way like Ferrania P30 which gave you a robust, bold image out of the box. This is thin weak shit, and to not forget the bigger picture, probably completely unprintable. I don't think I'll even try wasting any paper on it so I don't get even more angry.
Sorry for ranting, but it's been years since I have dealt with something so bad. (It also curls like a motherfucker and is near impossible to put into the scanner strip holder).
Seaparately from all that, I noticed the left and right edges of all scans are darker (in negative). This was the first time I was scanning 120 with a DSLR so I'm not sure if it's the holder, or the backlight, or something else causing it. Gonna have to troubleshoot it later, but I suspect the backlight not being uniform since it's very close to its edge there. I didn't have this issue when scanning 135 with the same setup (different holder obviously, but of the same kind).
