Kodak Slide N Scan Review

[@jmcgover100]

I was trying to decide between wolverine and kodak. Wish I had found your video earlier 😮‍💨. Great video!

[@FamilyHistoryHero]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@myronachtman4304]

It's October 2024 and I just purchased the latest version of the Wolverine F2D Saturn scanner. I tested 35mm color slides, color negatives, black and white negatives and 120 color negatives. All the results were total garbage. Fortunately, I was able to return the device. Thank you Amazon.

[@FamilyHistoryHero]

Thanks for the update on the Wolverine. I don't know why they would continue to produce disappointing results!

[@jessietrotter6156]

Thanks for the review info, Charlie! Right now it's available on Amazon for $169 for those who are contemplating purchasing one.

[@FamilyHistoryHero]

Thanks Jessie!

[@joetanner7479]

- This may be theee best presentation I've seen for any product on KZbin. Love the olde photos, too. Absolute time capsules. -

[@FamilyHistoryHero]

Am so glad you found Charlie's video helpful!

[@jscott6051]

Thank you, Charlie. This was one of the best reviews I've watched. There are a number of scanner units. You've helped me understand both the units but helped me consider that the choice depends greatly on my goals for using the photos once the slides are scanned. Great comparison information and your recommendations were perfect for me.

[@FamilyHistoryHero]

I'm glad you found it helpful!

[@mikem4814]

Bravo! A review with very detailed examples and explanations. Thank you!

[@melindastaley]

I purchased a Kodak Slide N Scan and completely agree with your final assessments. While the quality is not as good as my HP flatbed scanner, It does a pretty good job. The ease and quickness of use outweighs the loss of fine resolution for most photos. I was able to digitize about 10 boxes of slides in only a couple of hours, and without all of the hours of painful screeching of the flatbed in my ears. If any of the photos were important enough to warrant a higher resolution touch I could use the flatbed for them. Some simple editing in Photoshop Elements was able to improve the lighting of areas that weren't as bright as I wanted - the good thing was that the resolution was there to be able to bring them out. I did find that this was the best way to improve the lighting on them rather than using the exposure adjustments on the scanner itself which tended to blow out the lighter areas in teh process. Some other things I like about it - it comes with a cleaning brush to keep the imaging area tidy if some dust particles get in there while using it. I found that they were easily visible on the screen when they appeared and I could take care of it quickly and reimage the slide without fuss. I spend a significant amount of time cleaning up dust and scratches on images from our older scanner unfortunately. It also handles an amazing array of slide and negative sizes, and both positive and negative images give decent results. One minor thing I disliked: you can set a digital date on images as you create them, which I found helpful. But, it only goes back so far. I was working on images from the 70s and 80s, and while I could set a correct date for the more recent ones, it could not accommodate the oldest dates I was working with in this set of boxes.

[@FamilyHistoryHero]

Thanks for the thorough and thoughtful comment, Melinda. I'm glad your experience was similar to mine. That's a great observation that if you want a higher quality scan of a particular image you can always do a scan on a good flatbed!

[@keithhugh]

That was a great tutorial for the Kodak "scanner". Coincidently, I already had the Epson V600 so it was a GREAT comparison. Many thanks!

[@FamilyHistoryHero]

Thanks Keith. So glad you found it helpful!

[@jongkim8386]

Great review and you provide what I needed. Thank you so much!

[@FamilyHistoryHero]

@Jong Kim-Glad it was helpful!

[@reneed9374]

Thank you for the review and for showing the same pictures scanned with each one. I like it for the viewing capability to actually kick start the selection process.

[@FamilyHistoryHero]

You're welcome. Glad it was helpful. Yes, it does a really good job with viewing slides and negatives and might be worth getting just for that purpose!

[@katev3832]

Thank you, Charlie! I recently purchased the newly released 7" model. I was initially disappointed that I had "scanned" hundreds of negatives only to find the quality inconsistent. But now I appreciate so much being able to see each frame so clearly. I can then choose which frames I want to scan on the V600. Saves a lot of guesswork and time as I narrow down what photos I really want to work with.

[@FamilyHistoryHero]

Great insight! Yes, the V600 will be better for some negatives-usually the ones where the quality isn't as good, but they do take longer than using the Kodak, so now you have the best of both worlds!

[@gmagpa808]

Thanks, Charlie! Good job. Glad you are feeling so much better!

[@FamilyHistoryHero]

Thank you Cindy!

[@lesleyr.4173]

Thanks for the review. As the oldest sibling, I have the family slides and negatives. This will be a great tool to go through everything and select which ones to save and share.

[@FamilyHistoryHero]

Glad it was helpful!

[@MajTom-wd2yt]

Thank's a lot your review just knocked me off the fence I was on.

[@FamilyHistoryHero]

Glad I could help!

[@poppamichael2197]

Thanks for taking the time and making the effort to do this and present the results. Exactly what I wanted to know. I have the Epson V700, very similar to the Epson V600 you used for comparison. But the work was sooo slooow. I gave up by the second roll. I will give the Kodak a shot. If I find a photo from 40 years ago that is worthy of a large print, I can rescan that image alone on the Epson.

[@FamilyHistoryHero]

Thanks for the feedback Poppa Michael! That's a great strategy. The Kodak is worth having just to be able to review what's on the slides and negatives. Then you can use the flatbed on the best images that really matter. All the best to you as you work on your project!

[@ruthiew244]

Thank you for this comparison! Appreciate the detailed explanations. Now I need to learn Adobe Photoshop!

[@FamilyHistoryHero]

You're welcome! Photoshop is a great skill to have. You might want to check out my Photoshop and Photoshop Elements courses over at qwiklearn.teachable.com

[@TraciBrennan]

Thank you for a thoughtful and well balanced evaluation!

[@FamilyHistoryHero]

Glad it was helpful!

[@habigscrapbooks]

Thanks Charlie. Appreciate the information and clear explanations.

[@FamilyHistoryHero]

My pleasure!

[@qwasezeb7852]

Thank you! Looks like the Kodak will give me decent digital copies. Then I can find the ones I would want high-quality scans of.

[@FamilyHistoryHero]

Yes! It does a "good enough" job with most scans and helps you identify scans that might do better with on a good flatbed scanner.

[@terrifuentes4323]

Very helpful and informative. Appreciate you sharing the info.

[@FamilyHistoryHero]

Glad it was helpful!

[@thanhclips]

Excellent review. Thanks.

[@normapaschich6341]

Thanks, Charlie. Great job. Inspiring to

[@FamilyHistoryHero]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@billskis]

Excellent review. The comparative images between a flatbed, competitor and SnS were persuasive and your articulate commentary convincing. As Joe consumer, chances are I'll look at these photos like I did back in 1970 - open the envelope, pull the prints out, tab through each one and pull out the ones that are "keepers". I'd go to the drug store and make enough copies for my folks and inlaws. But rarely would we do enlargements, that cost too much! Jump to today, I'd do the same thing, but this time, I've made a permanent archive that can easily be handed down generation to generation, and I'm more inclined to share a lot more photos since it's simple and cheap. Now, for enlargements, if I ever find a photo I've taken that is that good, I'd probably get the film or slide scanned on a good flatbed scanner and go from there. No need to make high quality scans when I know the vast majority of the photos I took are of mediocre quality and value! Thank you.

[@FamilyHistoryHero]

Thanks for your kind words Bill. So glad you found it helpful, and kudos on your great progress with your family history!

[@alysonhughes671]

I’ve had great success with my Slide and Scsn until I came across some slides that are glass and much thicker than paper slides. They won’t fit. Is there something I missed? Thenks for your help.

[@FamilyHistoryHero]

Unfortunately the Slide N Scan only works for standard 35mm slides. I've never dealt with glass slides but I suspect those will have to be scanned on a regular flatbed scanner.

[@MegJohnson-z3d]

Hi! Thank you for this incredibly useful review. I am leaning towards this model, as I have twenty boxes of slides and countless negatives to transfer. I have a copy of photoshop on my computer, but have never used it. How easy was it to edit the slides in your examples? Would it be possible for you to share the settings for the changes you made? I plan on only changing some, but have no idea where to start. Thanks!

[@FamilyHistoryHero]

Glad you found the information helpful! Editing photos and slides is a learned art and is different for every image so I really can't give you any settings. I look at a photo a decide what is the biggest problem with it and I tackle each problem one at a time until I'm happy with the entire photo. I also use Photoshop Actions I created myself in Photoshop. Each action automates adjusting a different problem with a single click. For a Newby it would be easier to download the free Adobe Bridge app and use its "Camera Raw" feature to adjust photos by using sliders and other tools. At some point I'd like to teach a course in how to edit photos using both of these methods but I'm not at a point where I can take that on right now. Work on digitizing the slides and negatives first and eventually you can learn to edit them yourself or one of your descendants can do it!

[@BillRocklin]

Just purchased a Kodak Slide & Scan! I've got a simple question and can't seem to find the answer. When using this, does the SHINY side go in facing up? Or facing down?

[@FamilyHistoryHero]

For a slide to read properly the emulsion side, which is the dull side, should be face down, and the shiny side face up.

[@CrookedNose2131]

Great review. Thanks.

[@FamilyHistoryHero]

Thanks for watching!

[@WlodekZieland]

Hi, Just one question concerning scanning. When you scan negative files do you see the original view before scanning or just the negative and than after scanning you can view the result. I just want to use Kodak as "check machine" and than scan on Nikon Coolscan 8000. Regards from Poland.

[@FamilyHistoryHero]

You can set the Slide N Scan either way. When reviewing negatives the default is to show you the positive image. It's a wonderful tool for quickly seeing the positive images of what's on your negatives, whether you choose to capture them on the Slide N Scan or scan them on a higher quality dedicated scanner.

[@roseannreynolds8904]

Good info. My daughter bought me an Epson 680W Fast Foto. I've scanned a few pictures and they seem o.k. What are your thoughts on this one?

[@FamilyHistoryHero]

Hi Roseann, glad you found it helpful. The Epson FF680W is a terrific scanner. Here's my KZbin review: kzbin.info/www/bejne/fYKliZqoe66Xbtk

[@garyweisbrodt4440]

Is this the scanner that you mention. Epson Perfection V600 Photo Scanner - B11B198022

[@FamilyHistoryHero]

Yes, the Epson V600 is the flatbed scanner used for comparison, and that is a valid model number for the V600.

[@kalumarjuna80]

Thank you!!

[@FamilyHistoryHero]

You're welcome!

[@fritzsparky]

Could you compare Kodak Scanza digital film scanner with Kodak Slide & Scan?

[@FamilyHistoryHero]

We do not intend to do a review of the older Scanza. Here is a review that you might find helpful: www.slant.co/ai/kodak-scanza-2018-vs-kodak-slide-n-scan

[@franciscotomashernandez]

Excelentes ejemplos.

[@FamilyHistoryHero]

Me alegro de que lo hayas encontrado útil.

[@99suvres]

--- Slide thickness problem, solved, see below --- Hi there, I bought this Slide n Scan scanner after watching this video. I have problems with my parents' thicker slided films which dont fit in the mount of this product. Is there any way to get a seperate mount for this device that can fit bigger slides? Thanks in advance. Solution: ​ I dismantled the plastic piece into 2 seperate things, then just put the lower one in to the scanner and you can fit thicker slides through it. If the thing itself gets stuck, just use slide to open the whole, to pull it back. You will have to better adjust the slides doing it this way, though, since they are not fixed in one place very tightly.

[@FamilyHistoryHero]

You'd do best to reach out to Kodak's support. You can find a contact link on the Kodak website.

[@CiaranMeagher]

I have the same problem. Thicker, plastic framed slides just don't fit in properly. Did you manage to find a workaround?

[@FamilyHistoryHero]

@@CiaranMeagher I spoke with a support agent at Kodak today and he verified that the Slide N Scan was not designed to accommodate thicker plastic frames, but is designed for standard paper framed slides. At this point there is no option available from Kodak to address this. Our slides all have standard paper frames, so this is a new issue to us. I'll make a note in the description for the review video that addresses this issue.

[@99suvres]

​@@CiaranMeagher yes I did, I dismantled the plastic piece into 2 seperate things, then just put the lower one in to the scanner and you can fit thicker slides through it. If the thing itself gets stuck, just use slide to open the whole, to pull it back. You will have to better adjust the slides doing it this way, though, since they are not fixed in one place very tightly.

[@lindasattgast]

@@99suvres That was a clever workaround! Thanks for sharing.

[@Malcolm-Achtman]

For all intents and purposes the Kodak scanner seems perfectly fine to me. Maybe if you were a dentist and wanted to blow the slides up to examine the person's teeth, then maybe you'd want to stick to a flatbed scanner.

[@FamilyHistoryHero]

I just used the Kodak Slide N Scan yesterday to do a stack of slides thinking I would re-scan any really good photos on a flatbed scanner if necessary but now that I've gone through them I haven't felt the need to do that. No matter what I use to scan photos I always make at least a few adjustments in Photoshop so I did some of that but the images themselves were quite good and very large, which surprised me. The Slide N Scan camera must have pretty high resolution. For being a perfectionist by nature I've been pleasantly surprised!

[@Malcolm-Achtman]

@@FamilyHistoryHero That's encouraging! My brother just purchased the Kodak Slide N Scan device and we'll be putting it to the test tomorrow.

[@FamilyHistoryHero]

@@Malcolm-Achtman Let us know your experience with it!

[@Malcolm-Achtman]

@@FamilyHistoryHero I really wanted to like this product. The idea of previewing my slides and negatives on a 7" screen was enticing. Scanning images in 2 seconds instead of taking minutes on a dedicated flatbed scanner or film scanner was also very exciting. However, the inferior results spoke for themselves, and I'll list the issues now: 1) The sensor in the KODAK device automatically crops out 10% of the image area. Normally, this is not a big deal. However, sometimes you really want the areas at the perimeter of your negatives or slides. 2) For virtually all the KODAK scans, the contrast is excessive, no matter how you adjust the exposure on the device. This results in blown out highlights and crushed shadows that cannot be recovered in Photoshop or any other image editing application. 3) Fine details are completely lost. For example, I scanned a color slide of a man on the KODAK device and then on my EPSON V600 scanner. When looking at the man's arm on the EPSON scan, I can see every hair on his arm. On the KODAK image, the arm looks like it was made up from melted candle wax. No detail at all. Both scans were done at exactly 3048 ppi, which is the native resolution of the KODAK device (without using interpolation). 4) On some scans, the lighting on the KODAK files appears uneven across the image area. Sometimes, I can see a brighter "hot spot" in the center of the image. This never appears on my EPSON V600 scans. 5) Color accuracy in the KODAK scans is unpredictable. Some images are pretty good, but a lot of them make you believe the KODAK unit has a mind of its own. Attempting to tweak the colors using the device's built-in R-G-B sliders does not solve the problem. On amazon.ca, today's price of the KODAK Slide N SCAN is $300.00 Cdn. The EPSON V600 is $450.00 Cdn. When you consider that the EPSON device can be used for scanning both prints and film, and that you are not limited to just the small film sizes, it makes the $150.00 price difference "disappear." More importantly, if you truly want to archive your color slides and negatives with accurate renditions, it's hard to justify using the KODAK device and not have a pit in your stomach.

[@Malcolm-Achtman]

@@FamilyHistoryHero I really wanted to like this product. The idea of previewing my slides and negatives on a 7" screen was enticing. Scanning images in 2 seconds instead of taking minutes on a dedicated flatbed scanner or film scanner was also very exciting. However, the inferior results spoke for themselves, and I'll list the issues now: 1) The sensor in the KODAK device automatically crops out 10% of the image area. Normally, this is not a big deal. However, sometimes you really want the areas at the perimeter of your negatives or slides. 2) For virtually all the KODAK scans, the contrast is excessive, no matter how you adjust the exposure on the device. This results in blown out highlights and crushed shadows that cannot be recovered in Photoshop or any other image editing application. 3) Fine details are completely lost. For example, I scanned a color slide of a man on the KODAK device and then on my EPSON V600 scanner. When looking at the man's arm on the EPSON scan, I can see every hair on his arm. On the KODAK image, the arm looks like it was made up from melted candle wax. No detail at all. Both scans were done at exactly 3048 ppi, which is the native resolution of the KODAK device (without using interpolation). 4) On some scans, the lighting on the KODAK files appears uneven across the image area. Sometimes, I can see a brighter "hot spot" in the center of the image. This never appears on my EPSON V600 scans. 5) Color accuracy in the KODAK scans is unpredictable. Some images are pretty good, but a lot of them make you believe the KODAK unit has a mind of its own. Attempting to tweak the colors using the device's built-in R-G-B sliders does not solve the problem. On amazon.ca, today's price of the KODAK Slide N SCAN is $300.00 Cdn. The EPSON V600 is $450.00 Cdn. When you consider that the EPSON device can be used for scanning both prints and film, and that you are not limited to just the small film sizes, it makes the $150.00 price difference "disappear." More importantly, if you truly want to archive your color slides and negatives with accurate renditions, it's hard to justify using the KODAK device and not have a pit in your stomach.

[@victorialing4379]

I just ordered the Wolverine Titan cos of the 8 formats but now watching this, I might have to cancel!

[@FamilyHistoryHero]

It's always hard to know until you try something! The results speak for themselves...