Scanning Film Images into Digital Files

I would like some suggestions as to the "Pros" and "Cons" of different
ways of getting Film Images into Digital Files.

I currently still shoot all in film (not yet ready for the switch to
digital - waiting for the cost of the high-end SLR digitals to
come-down). I don't shoot a lot of rolls, probably about a dozen a
month or so. Mainly recreational (landscapes, family shots, etc.) as
well as a bunch of "sports" shots of my kids playing sports (soccer,
hockey, basketball, etc.).

I get my film developed by A&I photo by mailorder since I was not
happy with the local "2-hour crap labs" and A&I give me beautiful
prints (and enlargements if I want them) almost every time.

Anyway, I want to be able to get SOME of the photos I take into
digital format, mainly so that I can either post them up on a site
like "OFOTO" so that other people can view my images and order their
own prints. THis has lately become a big requirement since other
parents want to get copies of some of the "sports photos" I am taking
and putting them up on "OFOTO" is probably the easiest way (they view
them and then just can order them themselves).

Anyway, back to the issue. There seems to be several different ways
for me to get my photos into digital format, all with "Pros" and
"Cons".

1) I can send the film to "OFOTO" to get developed and they will
"Scan" my negatives for me. This is CHEAP (costs only about $4.00 to
develop my roll and scan it in) but I only get back my negatives (no
prints unless I order them)and I am pretty much stuck with trying to
view a low-res image on the OFOTO site. I can't download it to work
on it in Photoshop or anything. And they don't give you the option to
download a "Full Resolution" image. You can only download the "low
res" images posted on their sites.

2) A&I has an option that when I send them my film, they will scan it
into 4 to 5 Meg "TIFFS" using "Medium-Format FrontierScanning". THis
costs an extra $10 per roll, and they state that it is only good for
up to "4 x 6" prints. However, someone else told me that these images
should really be fine even up to 8 x 10 printing as long as I am not
doing "Commercial" work (which I am not).

3) Another option is to look into using the Kodak "Picture CD" or the
"Photo CD", which are options if I get the film developed by Kodak. I
haven't looked into the costs or resolutions yet.

4) I can buy a "flatbed scanner" and "Scan my Prints". I have no idea
how good the images will come out this way or anything about the
"technology" behind doing this (what type of scanner, etc.)

5) I can buy a "Film Scanner" and scan in my negatives. Again, I
don't really know a lot about this, and how much it costs and how good
the resolution will be.

My questions:

Given all the above options, what is the "best method" to get my film
(all color negatives only) into digital images given the type of
pictures I take (no commercial prints) and quantity (a dozen or two
dozen rolls a month).

Thanks!

Michael

In article ,
says...
I would like some suggestions as to the "Pros" and "Cons" of different
ways of getting Film Images into Digital Files.

Have you asked A&I if they will make a photo cd? That would be your
easiest option.
Next I would see if a local photofinisher will take your developed
negs and make a photo cd after you have A&I do the original developing
and printing.
Scanning prints will be very disappointing.
Scanning negatives for web-sized display requires a medium performance
scanner. Less than $300.
Scanning for enlargement to 12x or so requires a top performance film
scanner in the 4000+ dpi range. Nikon and Minolta make such models.
About $800.
Visit scantips.com for a good discussion of what the tradeoffs are.

--
Robert D Feinman
Landscapes, Cityscapes and Panoramic Photographs
http://robertdfeinman.com
mail:

(Michael) wrote in
om:

4) I can buy a "flatbed scanner" and "Scan my Prints". I have no idea
how good the images will come out this way or anything about the
"technology" behind doing this (what type of scanner, etc.)



The images won't come out as good as they would with a film scanner, and
the film scanner you buy won't do as good a job as the ones your photo
lab uses. Since you're happy with the results you get from A&I, it
doesn't make sense to me to change that just to help out other people.

Since you're basically talking about making photos available for friends
for free, I'd say go with what's easiest, which might be the flatbed
scanner. Especially if you can think of any other uses.

The problem is if you're doing a dozen rolls a month, that's 36 pictures
every other day, which is a lot of scanning.

You could try Wal-mart. Mine does a good job, but probably some others
don't. They will process the film, and for an extra $3 they will scan the
images and burn them to CD. Then you can make copies of the CD and other
parents can take the CD to walmart and get their own prints. Walmart uses
the Frontier printer/scanner system too.

Bob

--
Delete the inverse SPAM to reply

(Michael) wrote in
om:

4) I can buy a "flatbed scanner" and "Scan my Prints". I have no idea
how good the images will come out this way or anything about the
"technology" behind doing this (what type of scanner, etc.)



The images won't come out as good as they would with a film scanner, and
the film scanner you buy won't do as good a job as the ones your photo
lab uses. Since you're happy with the results you get from A&I, it
doesn't make sense to me to change that just to help out other people.

Since you're basically talking about making photos available for friends
for free, I'd say go with what's easiest, which might be the flatbed
scanner. Especially if you can think of any other uses.

The problem is if you're doing a dozen rolls a month, that's 36 pictures
every other day, which is a lot of scanning.

You could try Wal-mart. Mine does a good job, but probably some others
don't. They will process the film, and for an extra $3 they will scan the
images and burn them to CD. Then you can make copies of the CD and other
parents can take the CD to walmart and get their own prints. Walmart uses
the Frontier printer/scanner system too.

Bob

--
Delete the inverse SPAM to reply

(Michael) wrote in
om:

4) I can buy a "flatbed scanner" and "Scan my Prints". I have no idea
how good the images will come out this way or anything about the
"technology" behind doing this (what type of scanner, etc.)



The images won't come out as good as they would with a film scanner, and
the film scanner you buy won't do as good a job as the ones your photo
lab uses. Since you're happy with the results you get from A&I, it
doesn't make sense to me to change that just to help out other people.

Since you're basically talking about making photos available for friends
for free, I'd say go with what's easiest, which might be the flatbed
scanner. Especially if you can think of any other uses.

The problem is if you're doing a dozen rolls a month, that's 36 pictures
every other day, which is a lot of scanning.

You could try Wal-mart. Mine does a good job, but probably some others
don't. They will process the film, and for an extra $3 they will scan the
images and burn them to CD. Then you can make copies of the CD and other
parents can take the CD to walmart and get their own prints. Walmart uses
the Frontier printer/scanner system too.

Bob

--
Delete the inverse SPAM to reply

Generally, the scanner at your neighborhood photo shop is better than the one
you want to own.

Ah...but does the kid operating it know how to use it? There has been a lot
of misinformation in this thread. I suggest that the OP ignore it and look
into independent testers.

Start here... http://www.cameras-scanners-flaar.org/


"macro" wrote in message
om...
Generally, the scanner at your neighborhood photo shop is better than the
one
you want to own.

On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 22:06:29 GMT, macro
wrote:

Generally, the scanner at your neighborhood photo shop is better than the one
you want to own.

The scanner at my neighborhood photoshop is a Nikon LS4000. If you
don't less you get 60 meg files (4000 dpi) for each image at $1.00
each. Part of that $1.00 includes any necessary cleaning. They will
scan at lesser resolutions.

What you get when you go to any store, or mail order house varies
widely. You need to check ahead of time as some just stick in what
ever you send and give you snap shot quality while other go the
archival route complete with cleaning.

Me? I have a Nikon LS5000ED with the SF-210. With what I've saved so
far I not only could have paid for my scanner, but my D-70, the
lenses, Photoshop Elements, Photoshop CS and thrown in a nice, but
small new car.

OTOH I've been in here scanning almost daily for an hour or two since
last Winter. (I'm retired)

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

Roger Halstead wrote:
On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 22:06:29 GMT, macro
wrote:

Generally, the scanner at your neighborhood photo shop is better than the one
you want to own.

The scanner at my neighborhood photoshop is a Nikon LS4000. If you
don't less you get 60 meg files (4000 dpi) for each image at $1.00
each. Part of that $1.00 includes any necessary cleaning. They will
scan at lesser resolutions.

What you get when you go to any store, or mail order house varies
widely. You need to check ahead of time as some just stick in what
ever you send and give you snap shot quality while other go the
archival route complete with cleaning.

Me? I have a Nikon LS5000ED with the SF-210. With what I've saved so
far I not only could have paid for my scanner, but my D-70, the
lenses, Photoshop Elements, Photoshop CS and thrown in a nice, but
small new car.

OTOH I've been in here scanning almost daily for an hour or two since
last Winter. (I'm retired)

Is that the secret? I've wondered how I can get my collection
slides scanned while holding down a day job...

---- Paul J. Gans

Hi Mike,

Since you are talking about several rolls of film 12-24 (18) I would
consider getting a good film scanner. Check eBay for discontinued scanners
like the Kodak RFS scanners or the 3600, or others with similar features.
For a good price you can scan your own negatives and slides. Scans at a
real 3600 dpi or interpolates up to 4800.

http://www.kodak.com/go/professional

At the same time, if you are selective, you may want to consider using Photo
CD. This is much different than Picture CD. You can review them both on
the Kodak site at

http://www.kodak.com/go/photocd
http://www.kodak.com/go/picturecd

Photo CD converts your image into a multi resolution PCD file. You can then
open it into one of five selectable resolutions.
Picture CD is scanned to a 1536x1024 JPG file.

There are other scanners but they may be a bit pricey so, the used
reference.



I would like some suggestions as to the "Pros" and "Cons" of different
ways of getting Film Images into Digital Files.

I currently still shoot all in film (not yet ready for the switch to
digital - waiting for the cost of the high-end SLR digitals to
come-down). I don't shoot a lot of rolls, probably about a dozen a
month or so. Mainly recreational (landscapes, family shots, etc.) as
well as a bunch of "sports" shots of my kids playing sports (soccer,
hockey, basketball, etc.).

I get my film developed by A&I photo by mailorder since I was not
happy with the local "2-hour crap labs" and A&I give me beautiful
prints (and enlargements if I want them) almost every time.

Anyway, I want to be able to get SOME of the photos I take into
digital format, mainly so that I can either post them up on a site
like "OFOTO" so that other people can view my images and order their
own prints. THis has lately become a big requirement since other
parents want to get copies of some of the "sports photos" I am taking
and putting them up on "OFOTO" is probably the easiest way (they view
them and then just can order them themselves).