Noritsu Koki HS-1800 vs Fuji Frontier SP-3000: A Film Scan Comparison and the Influencer-Driven Film Look

I've been a Los Angeles wedding photographer for a long time, more importantly, I was a photo lab technician for over a decade when film was the industry standard. In other words, I know both the Noritsu Koki HS-1800 and Fuji Frontier SP-3000 film scanners very intimately, unlike many of the so-called influencers who "discovered" film a couple of years ago and now upload YouTube videos with underexposed, muddy film scans, cracked-to-the-max film presets, or Fujifilm recipes from the internet dot com, as if it's their gift to humanity.

And well before any of the current MsheU shill influencers even knew what film was, there were three camps of film photographers: one camp believing that the final look of your scans comes from an equal combination of the scanner, film stock, lens, and exposure. Another seeing it as a 50/50 split: half scanner, half everything else. And the third camp believing the person doing the scanning who had the biggest influence. And in the twenty-plus years I've been at this, I believe it's D, all of the above.

Hollywood Understands Film Better Than Most Film Wedding Photographers

We cannot begin to talk film scans and film scanners without first settling on how film is supposed to look. And what I believe film should look like is no different from what Hollywood has shown us over the decades. Movies like Jurassic Park, Clueless, Nacho Libre, Hail Caesar!, or Once Upon a Time in Hollywood all exemplify what 35mm film is supposed to look like. Ignore the influencers and just go watch movies from the '90s and early 2000s. Thankfully, Youtube Movies has a monthly rotation of movies shot on 35mm film.

Unfortunately, post-2020, an influencer got ahold of a film camera with a broken light meter, took random underexposed Dutch-angle photos, and the trend whores went apeshit calling it the definitive film look. Adding fuel to the fire, many "film" wedding photographers continue to push this made-up film aesthetic on Instagram, primarily consisting of underexposed, muddy images because one: they saw a famous photographer who didn't know what the fuck they were doing, or two: dug up faded family pictures and thought, yep, that's what film looks like.

Film has history that predates the current Instagram/YouTube film revival. The people who spent decades working with film at the highest levels established what properly rendered film can look like. So the newly popularized, heavily dutch angle, underexposed, muddy aesthetic shouldn't automatically be treated as the authentic or definitive film look. Because Hollywood has been shooting and finishing 35mm film for decades. The film industry figured this out long before your favorite YouTuber bought a Contax.

Film Scanners Don't Make Magic — Exposure Does

My first job right out of high school in 2005 was at a Ritz Camera in the Beverly Center. I was both a sales rep and a lab tech, and quickly learned the concept of "shit in, shit out" — referring to the idea that if you feed a scanner a roll of shit exposures, don't expect unicorn poop in return. Because proper exposure plays a far more significant role in the final image than the scanner does. Mind you, we used Fuji Frontier Optical printers, so there was very little room for corrections. This limitation cemented the idea of exposing film the same as Hollywood: meter at box speed, take the reading in the shadows, process normally, scan normally. And by normally, I mean the lab tech scans for neutrality in-scanner, with no additional edits.

Comparison A — Highlights

Nikon F5 + Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D + Kodak Gold 200
Exposed at box speed for the shadows no edits
Left: Noritsu — Right: Frontier
⬇︎

Comparison B — Shadows

Nikon F5 + Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G + Kodak Gold 200
Exposed at box speed for the shadows no edits
Left: Noritsu — Right: Frontier
⬇︎

approximate max resolutions

Noritsu HS-1800 vs Fuji Frontier SP-3000: Who Wore It Better?

Did you see a dramatic difference? Yes? No? Maybe? Same film, same exposure, two different scanners interpreting color the way they were designed, allowing the film stock, lens, and expose to do the heavy lifting. Because when film is exposed correctly, both scanners will produce near-identical results.

Personally however, I prefer the Fuji Frontier scanner for its incredible highlight retention, punchy contrast, slightly cooler color shift, greener foliage, and what many now call the "classic" film look. The Noritsu, in my opinion, looks more like a digital file trying to look like film, though it is better at preserving shadow detail, often rendering peachy skin tones.

One scanner is not better than the other. Or maybe they are? That's for you to decide. And two things worth noting: one, the Fuji Frontier crops in a bit compared to the Noritsu, and two, most lab techs agree the Noritsu is best suited for black-and-white film scans.

Custom Color is Not A Scanner Feature

Some of the more high-end photo labs offer custom color profiles, meaning your scans are edited in Lightroom post-scan. But keep in mind that custom color has NOTHING to do with the scanner itself. Both scanners use CMY color channels for optical separation, output in RGB. In other words, both scanners are physically limited in both color correction and density adjustment. So if a lab offers color packs, signature styles, premium scans, etc., it's not the scanner doing the work; it's someone editing the scans afterward. Meaning, even a random little photo lab in a strip mall can deliver film scans just as solid as a name-brand lab IF! You exposed your film correctly.

Do You Need High Resolution Film Scans?

Well, that depends. If you're getting paid and know your client will print 8x10s or even a 24x36, and you edit your scans afterwards, go for the max res. Otherwise, save your money. Stick to small or medium res scans if you're just starting out or only post on Instagram. This way, you can put the savings toward more film and processing because, as I always say, practice makes better. I'd rather see more people use film than fewer people getting high-res scans.

Which Film Scanner is Best For You?

As with anything, it always boils down to personal preference. Though here, it might just come down to how fast you want your scans back and how much you're willing to pay for them. Because when it comes to lab workflow, the Noritsu — being "newer" then the Fuji Frontier — can scan film faster, previewing six frames at a time. Allowing the lab to deliver Noritsu scans more quickly and, if they offer custom color profiles, often use the Noritsu. And while not customary, some labs might charge extra for Fuji Frontier scans. But not because they're better, but because the workflow is slower, previewing a single frame at a time.

But if you're confident in how you expose film, go for the Fuji Frontier. But it WILL disappoint you if you underexpose because the Frontier is best suited for those who use external light meters and do minor level adjustments or no edits at all. Go for the Noritsu if you're just starting out or not confident in your exposures, as the lab tech can more or less better balance in-scanner to some extent. And of course, if your lab has both scanners, have them run your film through both scanners so you can make your own comparison at home.