qyestion on converting old 35mm slides to jpeg files.....

~^ beancounter ~^ wrote:
I have a collection of old 35mm slides that I want to start
converting to digital jpeg files...What's my best bet on
doing this? I see a varaity of options and prices for
converters and services that do this type of work...What
are the opinions and ideas out there on price and quality?

Thanx !!!!


How good do you want them to be? That is, what's their intended use? If
they are to be permanent archives for your slides and you plan to throw
away the slides, a dedicated sanner is the way to go. You want to get
everything off of them.

However, if you want to project them with a computer-based system, or
make enlargements up to 8x10, there is another way to. Use a digital
camera to take pictures of them. I have an 8 mp camera and one of those
slide copying units I bought on EBay for about $60. I don't get every
last microspcopic detail, but I get close to it, and I can easily do 4-5
slides a minute. If grainy film was used for the slides, it will show up
un the copy. Enlargements up to 8x10 look extremely good. I keep the
slides, so if I ever need a very high quality copy of a particular
slide, I can have it scanned professionally. So far I haven't. You do
have to clean your slides if they are dirty, while some slide scanners
do automatic dust and scratch removal.

So you have to think about your end use. Just something to think about.

Joe

Have a look at this - http://www.scanace.com/en/product/1800u.php

A nice little scanner that produces excellent results from slides or
negatives in a reasonable time - mine cost about £100 a few years back.


"~^ beancounter ~^" wrote in message
ups.com...
" Doing them yourself will be very time consuming with any affordable
hardware. How many slides and how much time do you have? "


I have aprox 500 slides.....no real time limit....i guess...i saw
someone
state it took 30 min per slide on a nikon scanner to do a high quality
scan....that seems a bit long.....







On Oct 19, 9:28 am, ray wrote:
On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 06:42:05 -0700, ~^ beancounter ~^ wrote:
I have a collection of old 35mm slides that I want to start
converting to digital jpeg files...What's my best bet on
doing this? I see a varaity of options and prices for
converters and services that do this type of work...What
are the opinions and ideas out there on price and quality?

Thanx !!!!

Doing them yourself will be very time consuming with any affordable
hardware. How many slides and how much time do you have?

Yea Joe...Right On...I just sat down to the computer to ask the group
about the "funny thingy" I saw on eBay that acted like a holder
on the end of a lense...and I could just copy w/a 35mm
digital camera....

" I have an 8 mp camera and one of those
slide copying units I bought on EBay for about $60"

So, the quality is ok, I mean for the $$?...I wouldn't expect
near the results I would get out of a $1,000 piece of nikon
gear...But would you say you get more than 10% of the
quality result?.....It sounds more like 60-80%, no?

thanx !!!

btw: what would I search for to see these on eBay?






On Oct 19, 4:00 pm, Joseph Miller wrote:
~^ beancounter ~^ wrote:
I have a collection of old 35mm slides that I want to start
converting to digital jpeg files...What's my best bet on
doing this? I see a varaity of options and prices for
converters and services that do this type of work...What
are the opinions and ideas out there on price and quality?

Thanx !!!!

How good do you want them to be? That is, what's their intended use? If
they are to be permanent archives for your slides and you plan to throw
away the slides, a dedicated sanner is the way to go. You want to get
everything off of them.

However, if you want to project them with a computer-based system, or
make enlargements up to 8x10, there is another way to. Use a digital
camera to take pictures of them. I have an 8 mp camera and one of those
slide copying units I bought on EBay for about $60. I don't get every
last microspcopic detail, but I get close to it, and I can easily do 4-5
slides a minute. If grainy film was used for the slides, it will show up
un the copy. Enlargements up to 8x10 look extremely good. I keep the
slides, so if I ever need a very high quality copy of a particular
slide, I can have it scanned professionally. So far I haven't. You do
have to clean your slides if they are dirty, while some slide scanners
do automatic dust and scratch removal.

So you have to think about your end use. Just something to think about.

Joe

"~^ beancounter ~^" wrote in message
s.com...
David...aprox what is the $ investment in equipment...And, at what
point does it make since to buy the gear vs. have someone do
the conversion for me?...thanx......
I decided that something had to change after I had spent more than enough to
make a good downpayment on a scanner.
The incremental cost is that of a scanner. Regardless of who does the
scanning, you will need a photo editing program.
I got pretty good at the scanning after the first few hundred slides. I
have scanned more that 2000 slides and more than 3000 color negatives...
Another thing to consider is that over time both slides and negatives lose
quality. If, like me, you have a number of E2 and E4 slides, you will
need to do the scanning yourself. If, like me, you have alot of color
negatives made in the 70s and 80s, you will need to do the scanning
yourself.
Current emulsions seem much more stable.
Jim



On Oct 19, 8:06 am, ~^ beancounter ~^ wrote:
thank you David....

On Oct 19, 8:03 am, "David J. Littleboy" wrote:



"~^ beancounter ~^" wrote:

I have a collection of old 35mm slides that I want to start
converting to digital jpeg files...What's my best bet on
doing this?

IMHO, the best would be the Nikon Coolscan 5000, with the Nikon
Coolscan V a
very close second. (Actually, the cheaper "V" is perfectly adequate
unless
you need the features of the "5000".)

I see a varaity of options and prices for
converters and services that do this type of work...What
are the opinions and ideas out there on price and quality?

It's hard work and takes a lot of skill. There's a learning curve. I
found
it fun and worth the effort. YMMV, as they say.

Also, it depends on how good your slides are, and what you want. If
your
slides are very good and you'd like to make 11x14s or 12x18" prints
from the
better ones, the Nikon scanners are the right idea.

If you just have family snaps and only want 4x6" prints, then any of
the
Epson 4800 ppi scanners that does slides will be fine.

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Hey there everyone....anyone ever use a "Nikon Bellows System w/slide
copying adapter
mod. II" ? It is external gear/lense/adaptor that looks like it fits
most Nikon 35mm's
.......what level of quality might i expect when using it off of a
Nikon d200?

thanx.....




I decided that something had to change after I had spent more than enough to
make a good downpayment on a scanner.
The incremental cost is that of a scanner. Regardless of who does the
scanning, you will need a photo editing program.
I got pretty good at the scanning after the first few hundred slides. I
have scanned more that 2000 slides and more than 3000 color negatives...
Another thing to consider is that over time both slides and negatives lose
quality. If, like me, you have a number of E2 and E4 slides, you will
need to do the scanning yourself. If, like me, you have alot of color
negatives made in the 70s and 80s, you will need to do the scanning
yourself.
Current emulsions seem much more stable.
Jim

~^ beancounter ~^ wrote:
Hey there everyone....anyone ever use a "Nikon Bellows System w/slide
copying adapter
mod. II" ? It is external gear/lense/adaptor that looks like it fits
most Nikon 35mm's
......what level of quality might i expect when using it off of a
Nikon d200?

I don't know the Nikon unit specifically, but most camera
makers had something similar. It is a bellows for macro
work plus a second bellows which goes in front of the
lens and holds the slide.

What quality you get will depend on what lens you choose
to use with it. A good choice would be a reverse mounted
enlarging lens. A 50mm f/2.8 EL-Nikkor would be a very good
one for the purpose. You want it mounted backwards because
the slide is larger than your digital sensor. Nikon makes
reversing rings for the purpose. You will also probably
need a step up filter ring. A Nikon reversing ring will
probably have a 52mm filter, while the EL-Nikkor enlarging
lens has a 40.5mm filter ring.

Peter.
--

Peter Irwin wrote:
enlarging lens. A 50mm f/2.8 EL-Nikkor would be a very good
one for the purpose. You want it mounted backwards because
the slide is larger than your digital sensor.

Ooops, you don't want it mounted backwards.
You just need a F-mount to M-39 adaptor,
or you could use a Micro-Nikkor instead.

Peter.
--

In article
.com,
~^ beancounter ~^ wrote:

Hey there everyone....anyone ever use a "Nikon Bellows System w/slide
copying adapter
mod. II" ? It is external gear/lense/adaptor that looks like it fits
most Nikon 35mm's
......what level of quality might i expect when using it off of a
Nikon d200?

I have, a long time ago, with my trusty old F2 and the f/3.5 55mm
copy lens. (I think the model #s are P4 and P5.)

What I remember is that you need a good light source with the
proper color temperature. Now that I think about it, if you set
the white balance from the light source, you should have no
problems.

Clean the slides as none of the cameras have dust removal.

Quality should be as good as the slides scanned to produce the
same X by Y pixel counts as your camera.

--
Fred Lotte

Fred Lotte wrote:
In article
.com,
~^ beancounter ~^ wrote:

Hey there everyone....anyone ever use a "Nikon Bellows System
w/slide copying adapter
mod. II" ? It is external gear/lense/adaptor that looks like it
fits most Nikon 35mm's
......what level of quality might i expect when using it off of a
Nikon d200?

I have, a long time ago, with my trusty old F2 and the f/3.5 55mm
copy lens. (I think the model #s are P4 and P5.)

What I remember is that you need a good light source with the
proper color temperature. Now that I think about it, if you set
the white balance from the light source, you should have no
problems.

Clean the slides as none of the cameras have dust removal.

Quality should be as good as the slides scanned to produce the
same X by Y pixel counts as your camera.

Just as a reference: some time back I found a single disc from the
flat Kodak. This will show just a little of what photographing film
(color print film in this case) can yield:
http://www.fototime.com/inv/23CFFDAD83C8C7E

Frames were 8x11mm. I don't know the ASA of the example film.

The CP995 Nikon was 3.14 MP.

For many uses, not much more is needed.

--
Frank ess

thanx Fred for the info...this old Nokon gear is up fs on ebay...I may
try
it and see what I end up with...I will think about quality light and a
good, clean
35mm slide......I'll see if I can get a decent image "on the cheap"
instead
of a few hundred $'s for a scanner.......Cheers !!!!



On Oct 31, 4:30 pm, Fred Lotte wrote:
In article
.com,
~^ beancounter ~^ wrote:

Hey there everyone....anyone ever use a "Nikon Bellows System w/slide
copying adapter
mod. II" ? It is external gear/lense/adaptor that looks like it fits
most Nikon 35mm's
......what level of quality might i expect when using it off of a
Nikon d200?

I have, a long time ago, with my trusty old F2 and the f/3.5 55mm
copy lens. (I think the model #s are P4 and P5.)

What I remember is that you need a good light source with the
proper color temperature. Now that I think about it, if you set
the white balance from the light source, you should have no
problems.

Clean the slides as none of the cameras have dust removal.

Quality should be as good as the slides scanned to produce the
same X by Y pixel counts as your camera.

--
Fred Lotte