Review on Plustek OpticFilm 8200i SE scanner black by Ognian Velikov ᠌

I use both programs in multiple exposure mode to scan old family bw films. This practically does not affect the result, rather a placebo, but it is this mode that is set in the programs by default. VieScan is faster and more convenient. In the case of normally exposed frames, both programs give almost the same result. In the case of underexposed or contrasting frames, the VieScan result can be catastrophically bad due to a program bug. Such frames are scanned by SilverFast with the correction of the resulting negative in Photoshop. Processing such frames after VieScan requires a little more effort and, in my opinion, the result is a little rougher. In general, the scanner pulls out all the information that is there from the bw film. For this task, it makes no sense to buy more expensive models. Moreover, if you are interested in black and white films, you can limit yourself to the Plustek 8100 model, which is cheaper due to the elimination of infrared scanning, which is important only for color materials. It was possible to compare the 8200i SE with more advanced models from Reflecta. When working with bw films, the result is almost identical, but the reflections work significantly, sometimes several times, slower. With colored materials, the situation changes and reflections win both in terms of speed and quality of the result. For illustration, I have attached 2 scans made by Plustek using the VieScan program without removing scratches and dust particles and using the bundled Silverfast with default cleaning. It can be seen that there are much fewer defects on the frame. For comparison, I added a scan made 7 years ago by a Reflecta ProScan 7200 scanner running CyberView with cleaning in the default mode. The skies are much clearer and this result could be further improved with Silverfast. I could not correctly compare the color reproduction, but it seemed that the reflections give more saturated colors. I'll try to do this comparison later.