Datamind: Suppliers of Archos Accessories, Scanning Pens, Digital Pens, Film Scanners, Skype accessories, GPS and more

Epson Perfection 2450 scans 6 x 17cm panoramic film

Discussion Summary - updated 14th November 2003

Although the specs say 4" x 5", the light source covers an area of about 5 x 11 inches (recessed into the scanner lid for film scanning) so two 617 could be batch scanned.
or se just the film scan area of 4"x9" = 10x22.8cm - sufficient for one 6 x 17cm negative.
Leave a "gap" of light at the top of the scanner, near the hinge area, leave a bit of white space from the next photo on the filmstrip up near the last part of the glass, to let it shine through.
Experiment with raising the film off the glass by 1/16 to 3/32 inch Not just to avoid the Newton rings & moire patterns but the scanner might focus just a little above the glass when scanning film.
- Build a holder that keeps the film off the glass using sandwich of black cover-weight paper and black matte board (use Epson's holders as a template) or make a cardboard or plastic spacer.

Edited from http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=002FvB

Question from Laurence Smith , May 20, 2002: I have tried scanning 6x17 (2 1/4 x 7 inch) panoramic transparencies on the Epson 2450. I experience "scan lines" and a gaudy purple cast on the output. I've scanned 6x6 and 35mm directly on the glass, as well as using the templates, and had no problem with this.I do not get a magenta cast or any "scan lines" on scans of smaller transparencies, whether or not they are in the template holders. Just the larger 6x17s, which I place directly on the glass. I did try putting the pan transparency in the template for the medium format and it scanned fine on the area that was available. I also tried making a temporary cardboard template around the 6x17 to block out extraneous light, but still go the lines and purple cast. I'm pretty much thinking (and hoping) it is a result of light bouncing around incorrectly, and may be related to the extraneous light (or lack of) caused by the configuration of my temporary template. I'll construct a new template based on the gap in the normal templates, and see what happens. I read in a post somewhere that (I think) 3/32 of an inch was the optimal focusing point.

Okay! I think that the problem is solved! There is DEFINITELY a relationship to having a "gap" of light at the top of the scanner, near the hinge area. I re-scanned the image and just left a bit of white space from the next photo on the filmstrip up near the last part of the glass, to let it shine through. No more bad scan lines, and the image is pretty much true to form. I'll keep experimenting to see how I might get the best "mix" of white space at the top of the glass for future images.

Martin Drozda , May 21, 2002 replies: I used to have an Epson 1200. The purple cast comes from the purple lamp in the transparency adapter. Because of some great reason the designers decided not to put in a daylight balanced lamp, but a lamp with a slightly purple cast. At least for my 1200 this was the case. It showes up well if you have some whites in your slides. I guess the lamp in 2450 was not upgraded.

Zap Trax , May 21, 2002 replies: I think there must be some way you can make the mask so you get rid of the stray light. First, be sure not to block the open area at the end of the mask that goes nearest the hinge of the scanner (there's some kind of white bracket line and circle/slash in that area. I had a cardboard mask blocking this area and got the purple cast but when I cut the mask so this wasn't blocked the cast went away. I think you should also experiment with raising the film off the glass. Not just to avoid the Newton rings but the scanner might focus just a little above the glass when scanning film.

Bob Atkins May 21, 2002 replies I thought the 2450 was limited 4x5 inches when scanning transparent media. How do you scan a 7" long transparancy, or am I wrong about the scanner specs?

Laurence Smith May 21, 2002 replies: Interestingly, the light source recessed into the scanner lid covers an area of about 5 x 11 inches! So, to scan the 6x17, I place it within that area (without a template at this point, of course). I wonder if I could lay two 6x17s together, and scan it as a rough 12x17? That would be a 4 1/2 x 7 inch after the proper cropping, lining up, and stitching was applied....food for thought and experimentation.

William Nicholls, May 21, 2002 replies: Beware of moire patterns when scanning film in contact with the glass. I'd suggest you try to build a holder that will keep the film off the glass perhaps using a sandwich of black cover-weight paper and black matte board using Epson's holders as a template. I get moire patterns when scanning 4x5 using Epson's holder if the film sags and contacts the glass.

Norman Koren , May 22, 2002 replies: On the spacing: The 2450 varies somewhat from unit-to-unit. 1/16 inch spacing is best on mine. 3/32 is a little high-- out of spec. I suggest you try two or three scans, examining them closely. You'll probably want to make a cardboard or plastic spacer. I have more information on http://www.normankoren.com/Tutorials/Epson_flatbeds.html

Jeremy Kindy , May 24, 2002 replies: Your scanner needs calibration to remove purple cast
My scanner's templates (I have an acer 1240UT) all have strips on them allowing for light to pass through, so the scanner can calibrate itself. I assume this is a white balance calibration. That's probably why you need the strip cut out of the template, and why you get the purple cast when you don't have it.

discussion excerpt from http://www.binbooks.com/books/photo/i/l/541C6AE60D

"Leonard Evens" <len@m...> wrote on Feb 18, 2002
The 2450 can scan an area 4 x 9 inches at 2400 ppi. That is 10 x 22.8 cm. None of the carriers are designed for 6 x 17 format, but you should be able to make your own film holder out of stiff cardboard or thin plastic. There are only two problems with doing that. You have to make sure the film area is within the 4 x 9 in window, and you have to leave some open space at the top end for the scanner to calibrate. I've experimented with some film holders I made myself, and I can't tell the difference between those and the ones that came with the scanner as far as the quality of the scan is concerned.

I am having trouble figuring out how to hold the film in the holder and to align it with the sides, but eventually I will work something out. I suspect you can just lay the film directly on the glass and get good
results, except that you may get interference patterns such as Newton rings. Putting it emulsion side down and flipping in a photoeditor should help avoid that.

Whatever method you use, you will want to hold the film as flat as possible, although some initial tests seem to indicate this is not really critical. I've been having trouble with this with old film which has
curled, and I haven't figured out a good solution. Holding it between thin sheets of glass or clear plastic might be a solution, but it might affect the quality of the scan. Some people have suggested using special oils to hold the film to the glass. I haven't tried any of these solutions because I don't want to damage the glass surfac