Plustek OpticFilm 8200i SE scanner black Review

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…

In general, the product leaves a good impression, but the shortcomings of the included software and the inability to work with narrow films do not allow us to give this device from Plustek the highest score.

Sharing my unbiased usage feedback.Pros below: Very good scan quality and dust removal function Has cons: Build quality (but not critical), raw program included

To digitize a large home archive, what is needed, because of the "pair" of films, it is naturally not worth taking. the advantages greatly outweigh the disadvantages. With its pros: It produces good quality scans, you can squeeze quite a lot using the program settings even from bad, scratched films. Compact size, plus a convenient case with a handle for carrying and storing. The program has a lot of settings even in a stripped-down SE version. . There is a separate frame for slides, in addition

I took to replace the failed Minolta DiMage Scan Elite 5400, I expected some deterioration in quality when scanning negatives. It turned out exactly the opposite - the scanner pierces the film much more clearly, giving excellent results even on the machine! The image initially turns out to be juicier, more voluminous and an order of magnitude more detailed. I did not expect, thanks Plustek! Rescan the archive again, or what? :)

In general, the scanner can be rated at "4". To scan a small archive of films, an amateur photographer will do, but it takes patience and a lot of time. Moreover, there are no special alternatives on the market now. After fixing the blue color problem, it became very good. You can focus on the actual scanning. During the time that has passed since the purchase of the scanner, I scanned 105 films. The process is fine. I scan at 3600 dpi. One frame takes an average of 5 minutes.

I'll start with the good) the best scanning option is Quick scan jpg 24 bit - quickly and efficiently. Ideal for those who shoot on advanced film DSLRs with 35mm film. Developed, sliced, scanned (add 10 units of contrast and VOILA normal photos). You can experiment with SilverFast but I think it's good for older films or where a wide range of colors is needed. Frankly infuriates the design of the frame for the film and the receiving hole in the scanner. It was possible to make everything much

I bought it in the summer, I'm satisfied, but . The assembly is terrible, the buttons are loose, the rubber frames on the sides are peeling off. The frame for the film is flimsy, its dividing strips are thick, the last frames no longer stand up straight. The case is quite convenient, after scanning, you can hide the scanner from dust. SilverFast itself is very buggy: braking, freezing, crashes. The scanner scans quickly (I scan at 3600dpi, TIFF, then I convert and compress for the web, it works

There is a feeling that underexposed negatives are scanned much better than overexposed or overdeveloped ones; with dark shamanism more. Remove defects - for an amateur, because. the program sometimes does it superbly, and sometimes it's better to disable this feature altogether. Since since childhood, when I was engaged in a photo studio, all my cuts are 7-frame, a lot of nuances have arisen here, because. Included is a frame for 6-frame cutting and does not have "overhangs" where you could…

While I’m only scanning color negatives, I really liked the dust removal function, you don’t even have to clean the film), I don’t know how others have a lot of blue, the scan is normal during the preliminary scan, but everything is blue on the main scan, you have to remove the blue to a minimum and then it’s fine .

I have been using it 1-2 times a month at work for more than two years. Histological slides are placed in the film frame (the manufacturer has a model specifically for histology, but it is not supplied to us). The resulting quality of overview images is higher than with a cheap 5Mpx USB camera and a stereo microscope (the cost of this kit is more than 100). For lack of a better option, it is an acceptable and very budgetary option for obtaining overview images of histological preparations.

The build quality does not cause me any complaints, the buttons play, but this does not affect anything - it's more of a design feature, not a bad build. Everything else is good. The frames are excellent compared to the Epson tablet. Scanning quality in my comparison (in ascending order): Epson tablet -> minilabs -> Plustek 8200. Its disadvantages are the common disadvantages of most filmmakers: cut film in 6 frames; scratches on the film are very noticeable compared to a flatbed (IR scanning…

With its pros: Compact, good resolution, many settings when scanning, good color reproduction Different cons: There is no automatic film feed for scanning. You need to move the frame with your hands for each next frame

Bought to digitize old negatives. I expected that everything would be much worse, but the scan quality was surprisingly pleasing. In quick scan mode, it scans a frame for 3 minutes, in intelliscan mode with IR pass - 15 minutes per frame. For a long time. But it completely removes scratches and dust from the frame. Why the scanner has rubber bumpers on the sides and a bag-cover in the kit - I did not understand, it is not supposed to be carried with you. Silverfast is an extremely…

In general, there is a detailed analysis of this device on the net - in fact, it simply inflates the scan by 4000 to 7000. But this device is attractive in price. It's not a hundred thousand after all. Has pros: Took for digitization of a home photo archive. Of the pluses - a relatively low price, good scan quality from a color negative. Works generally fast at low resolutions. It’s profitable to buy it if you scan about a thousand frames yourself, give it somewhere to scan - the amount will be

The software bundled with the SilverFast 8 SE leaves much to be desired. Quite difficult to understand and master. Old drivers used to shift colors to blue, now this seems to have been fixed. But most importantly, this software does not allow you to save a file with a color depth of 48bit with hardware cleaning from iSRD dust and scratches in RAW format at the output. To do this, you need to buy the SilverFast Ai Studio editor for 300 Euros. Therefore, through long experiments, I settled on…