[tecleandor]

What scanner are you using, out of curiosity?

Funny thing is, in general, low and midrange desktop scanners that public can generally buy, haven't changed much in 10-20 years since they started using led lights and IR dust removal (Canon Fare, Digital ICE or similar stuff). Some are even the same hardware just slightly rebadged or with a different USB connector. But they're the same price or more expensive.

And, at a different level, professional film scanners are EXPENSIVE. Lots of people are now scanning their film using a digital camera and led backlight (now that there is affordable good quality led lights) instead of a dedicated scanner. But that's not very fast and requires some extra manual work. If this scanner offers reasonable quality and a good workflow (that not very proprietary or closed), 1000-1500 dollars is a reasonable price, especially if you have lots of film coming in, or an old collection to scan.

I could imagine my dad buying one of this to scan his hundreds and hundreds of rolls from the 70s/80s and then selling it once he finish. It would be like 1-3 USD per rolled scanned :)

[majormajor]

In the "things that fit on your desk" category, slow is pretty relative - people on ebay still want thousands for Nikon 9000 scanners, and those were not fast if you were scanning high-res 16-bit. And always needed time in post too (cropping/straightening/tweaking exposure and color). An ILC kit can go a lot more quickly.

[rckt]

it's plustek OpticFilm 7200, I bought it second-hand.

[TwoFerMaggie]

This one would be much faster than the plustek though, if they keep their promises. I use a 8200. It takes more than 1 hour to scan a 36 frame color negative with dust removal on, and it requires constant manual input. Pushing the holder to the next frame, unloading and loading the holder, etc.

It's fine, sure. For the price I paid for it and the image quality I'm getting, I have no complaints. On the other hand, a new device that can cut the time down to 5 mins with modern software support (silverfast is kind of dated and VueScan will run you another 100), while priced at 1000 EUR, is not cheap, but also not that unreasonable tbh.

[rckt]

For a studio or a professional - sure. For me, an amateur, who simply does film photography for his own amusement, it makes no sense. I also use standing development process that takes around 40 mins. So the speed is irrelevant for me.