Hewlett-Packard S20 PhotoSmart

This was my first film scanner, and 3 years after purchasing it I'm still very happy. -Software: The software is easy to use, and seems less "bloated" than some other HP software. The colour and exposure correction work well, especially with overexposed film. A rotation tool can also be used, and it does not adversely affect the sharpness of the image. Multiple scans from one film strip are possible by holding CTRL and clicking on the preview images. My only (minor) complaint is that it gives a "Scan####" filename to every image. I correct this when doing post-scan touch-up, but it's a bit annoying not to be able to give images filnames right away. -Scans: Without correction, the colours match those on the actual film. Sharpness is very good; the grain of Fuji Reala 100 print film, for example, is clearly visible in full-resolution (2400 DPI) scans. A bit of colour separation is visible (thin vertical lines will have a bit of red on one side and a bit of green on the other) but it is not apparent without zooming in. Shadow detail on negative film is fantastic. The scans from negatives tend to be better than those of slides. Scans of slides usually appear underexposed, and there is some shadow noise. But since most of my scanning involves negatives, that's not an issue. I've never scanned prints with it, since I bought it solely to scan film. -Overall: Niggles aside, this scanner gives a lot of bang for the buck. Although I would not recommend as strongly for slide use, it nevertheless is a good all-around performer and a suitable entry-level film scanner.

-east-to-use software -resolution (2400 DPI) -colour reproduction

-grainy shadow detail (slides) -underexposure (slides) -inability to choose filename

None

Not Required

I wanted to use this to bridge the gap while I am waiting for digital SLR prices to drop down to something I can afford. I scan slide film (faster if you leave the strips unmounted) and upload them to snapfish if I want prints of my slides. On the plus side, this scanner has terrific resolution. I can always see the grain in 100 speed provia/sensia slide film before I can see the pixels. I don't know why you would want to blow your cash on a 4000 dpi scanner when you are shooting on 100 to 400 speed film. You simply don't need that much horsepower. On the down side, I take some astrophotograpy and star trails slide shots, and you need to tweak the brighness/sharpness in the software to get the colors and details out of the scan. But you can usually get it to come out ok with some patience. Color negative film scans ok- I dunno if this is a shortcoming of the scanner or if slide film is just that much better at recording details... But enough complaining for the $120 bucks I spent. This scanner certainly fills the void until the 'super coolscan' prices and/or digital SLR prices come down to the $500 range. Before your old negatives and slides age too much or you think it is time to toss your film SLR, go out and get yourself one of these scanners for 100 bucks. This is the best money I have spent on ANY piece of photography gear in the last 10 years.

Price Resoulution

Detail in dark areas Speed (USB)

N/A

I purchased my Photosmart S20 a couple of years ago. It worked reliably and well for about a year, then I left it covered and untouched sitting at my desk for around six months. When I uncovered it and turned it on again, all scans had a dark line through them, and auto-calibrate failed telling me I needed to clean the lens. After several hours spent carefully cleaning and inspecting the unit, I could find no dust, and the line did not go away. Fast forward to today, 6 months later, my girlfriend asked to use the scanner, so I uncovered it and tried again. Same problem. Frustrated, I pulled out the Torx T-15 screwdriver and lo and behold, discovered it was NOT dust, but instead a piece of glass covering the CCD had cracked. This was not due to misuse, overuse, or anything of the like, as the machine was sitting untouched, and had only been used to scan about 20 rolls of film (the scan quality was certainly NOT worth $25 per roll...). A search for this problem led me to a thread on photo.net, in which one post claims the cracked glass, or "self-destruct" feature, is a well known flaw caused by overly strong glue holding the glass combined with heat expansion/contraction resulting in undue stress on the glass. Over time, the glass, which is not resilient, will crack: http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=0016Y6 I contemplated purchasing another S20 to replace this as they are going for only $99 now on overstock.com, surely less than the cost of a repair. But I hardly think it's worth it. Even $5/roll is too much, and I have little faith a 'new' one would even last that long. I'd recommend staying away from this scanner, and purchasing a newer model.

Good scan quality for the price. Versatility (scans prints, slides, and negatives)

Outdated Overpriced Poor construction technique leads to durability problems

Flatbed scanners (many models, currently Epson Perfection 610), but have since switched to digital cameras.

N/A

I needed to scan films, so at first i went for the most attractive option: i bought a flatbed scanner with a transparency adaptor (actually, a 5740c from HP). The results, on film scanning, were basically bad, specially on dark areas of black and white films. So i decided to get a real film scanner - under a budget - so i had to chooce between the HP S20 and the Minolta Dimage. I went for the HP scanner since it also scanners prints and... well, I have friends who own S20's and all the reviews were very positive. I've got the S20 for more than two weeks now and it has been working fine, with very good results (slides and negatives). It is not very suitable for print scanning, though it does the job. Overall, I'm happy with it, so far.

- excelent quality/price relation (very good quality [resolution, color depth and, of course, final result] and low price for a film scanner) - easy to install - good software

- dust specs (has to be cleaned often) - noisy - cannot scan aps

- hp 5470c - epson perfection 1650 photo

- only experienced it through the web (no complaints)

I chose between the HP and the Minolta Dimage. My choice went for the HP because I own a few HP products since before and I have a high confidence in HP making good quality hardware and software. Generally speaking, the scanner has worked without problems for a year now. I have processed about 1500+ slides and a few negatives and I am quite happy with the results. I use the scanner connected to a 350 Mhz PII with 128 Mb RAM, which is a bit slow. Films used: Fuji Velvia and Kodak Extra Color (both 100 ASA slide films). Installation: no problems Operation: without major problems Software: good Quality: good Performance: good Scanning a slide in highest resolution (2400 dpi) takes about 45 seconds on my computer. The post-processing takes about a minute per slide. Here, a faster computer would be nice. Since it is likely that you will have a photo processing software open at the same time, I would strongly recommend 128 Mb as a minimum RAM, and 300-500 Mbyte free disk workspace.

Sharpness od scans: excellent Color: excellent The image adjustment controls (contrast, darkness, gamma, color balance, hue, saturation) are easy to use. Quite intuitive software user interface in general.

Masking of slides is a bit tricky and does not work to perfection. Sometimes you end up with having masked with an unintentional bias of +/- 10 pixels, meaning that a post processing in picture software is needed to get rid of dark frames. Slides can be rotated (+/-1 degree resolution) but the results don’t always match the expectation, so better not use it. The handling of slide selection and file naming text boxes could work better, error-prone in particular when scanning strips of slides or negatives, risk is that you only will scan one slide even you wanted to scan several. Slides with underexposed shadows: If you compensate the shadows to the lighter, you will get noise. Better leave the shadows underexposed imo. Areas with dark details of vertical shape against light background, such as tips of branches against a light sky, or high grass in sunlight. Often you get color aberration, areas a few pixels wide, purple color to the left, green to the right of the branch. This has no impact in practice, pictures look good when printed or viewed at screen size, but I wanted to mention it. FYI the HP does not support APS, which is not a concern in my case

Used with Ulead Photo Impact software for processing, and HP deskjet 950C for prints.

N/A