If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Scanner for photos and film
I'd like to go through my shoe boxes of photos and negatives and digitize them all. I'm looking for advice on the best way of going about this. I'm looking to scan everything, rather than cherry picking individual images, then process everything when it's done. Is there a particular scanner that folks recommend for doing this relatively quickly and easily? Ideally I'd like to have the capability of scanning prints as well, in cases where I have prints but no negatives. I have both regular 35mm film and APS cartridges. Windows or Mac is fine. My internet research seems to indicate that the Epson Perfection V700 or V750 would be good candidates but I'm not sure whether there is a way to deal with APS film on these scanners. Also, my retailer of choice would be Pixmania (they have a Luxembourg page on their site and I'm in Luxembourg until January). However, I note that the one they have is listed as a V750 while many sites found through Google are referencing the V750-M. I can find no comparison of these two or indication of whether it is indeed just an updated name for the same model. Does anyone know whether the M version is more recent? Thanks in advance Cams |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Scanner for photos and film
On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 03:57:12 -0600, Cams wrote:
I'd like to go through my shoe boxes of photos and negatives and digitize them all. I'm looking for advice on the best way of going about this. I'm looking to scan everything, rather than cherry picking individual images, then process everything when it's done. Is there a particular scanner that folks recommend for doing this relatively quickly and easily? Ideally I'd like to have the capability of scanning prints as well, in cases where I have prints but no negatives. You can't do it 'relatively quickly and easily'. If you have very many, which it sounds like you do, it will be very time consuming no matter what equipment you choose. I have both regular 35mm film and APS cartridges. Windows or Mac is fine. My internet research seems to indicate that the Epson Perfection V700 or V750 would be good candidates but I'm not sure whether there is a way to deal with APS film on these scanners. Also, my retailer of choice would be Pixmania (they have a Luxembourg page on their site and I'm in Luxembourg until January). However, I note that the one they have is listed as a V750 while many sites found through Google are referencing the V750-M. I can find no comparison of these two or indication of whether it is indeed just an updated name for the same model. Does anyone know whether the M version is more recent? Thanks in advance Cams |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Scanner for photos and film
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Scanner for photos and film
Cams wrote:
I'd like to go through my shoe boxes of photos and negatives and digitize them all. I'm looking for advice on the best way of going about this. I'm looking to scan everything, rather than cherry picking individual images, then process everything when it's done. Is there a particular scanner that folks recommend for doing this relatively quickly and easily? Ideally I'd like to have the capability of scanning prints as well, in cases where I have prints but no negatives. I have both regular 35mm film and APS cartridges. Windows or Mac is fine. My internet research seems to indicate that the Epson Perfection V700 or V750 would be good candidates but I'm not sure whether there is a way to deal with APS film on these scanners. Also, my retailer of choice would be Pixmania (they have a Luxembourg page on their site and I'm in Luxembourg until January). However, I note that the one they have is listed as a V750 while many sites found through Google are referencing the V750-M. I can find no comparison of these two or indication of whether it is indeed just an updated name for the same model. Does anyone know whether the M version is more recent? Thanks in advance Cams I use a dedicated slide/negative scanner and a separate photo scanner for prints etc. There may well be combination scanners that will do both equally well, but I would think that the quality of the finished scan will be a compromise. I stand corrected if I am wrong about this. Dennis. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Scanner for photos and film
Scanning negatives is not a quick process if you do it yourself and
expensive if you get someone else to do it. I done mine over about 6-8 months, running the scanner in the background and feeding it a new strip about very every half a hour. Part of the process was the scanning, but if you include the ICE process (to remove dust and scratches), it takes longer. It worked out about 6-8 minutes per frame (scanned at 16 bits per channel, max resolution, with ICE and saving as TIFF, which were about 140MB each). 6-8 minutes may not sound like much, but if you have thousands of photos, it's a big task. Also, this is just the scanning process, there is also the post production to think of, which will probably be about the same, unless you batch process. I used a Nikon film scanner myself, which was handy because it allowed me to just feeding the strips straight into the scanner without having to mount them in a holder first. Before scanning, I would clean with a lint free cloth, then blow the negs with a pressurized photographic air blower. Mind you, my negs were already in very good condition, as I stored them in special folders. I done as you are planning to do and scan everything, then sort them afterwards, although I didn't scan any photos that I knew were definitely binners. "Cams" wrote in message ... I'd like to go through my shoe boxes of photos and negatives and digitize them all. I'm looking for advice on the best way of going about this. I'm looking to scan everything, rather than cherry picking individual images, then process everything when it's done. Is there a particular scanner that folks recommend for doing this relatively quickly and easily? Ideally I'd like to have the capability of scanning prints as well, in cases where I have prints but no negatives. I have both regular 35mm film and APS cartridges. Windows or Mac is fine. My internet research seems to indicate that the Epson Perfection V700 or V750 would be good candidates but I'm not sure whether there is a way to deal with APS film on these scanners. Also, my retailer of choice would be Pixmania (they have a Luxembourg page on their site and I'm in Luxembourg until January). However, I note that the one they have is listed as a V750 while many sites found through Google are referencing the V750-M. I can find no comparison of these two or indication of whether it is indeed just an updated name for the same model. Does anyone know whether the M version is more recent? Thanks in advance Cams |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Scanner for photos and film
Ali wrote:
Scanning negatives is not a quick process if you do it yourself and expensive if you get someone else to do it. Scanning negatives or slides is a classic example of the quality/speed/price choice: You get to pick any two of the three. -- Mark Roberts Photography & Multimedia www.robertstech.com 412-687-2835 |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Scanner for photos and film
ray wrote: On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 03:57:12 -0600, Cams wrote: I'd like to go through my shoe boxes of photos and negatives and digitize them all. I'm looking for advice on the best way of going about this. I'm looking to scan everything, rather than cherry picking individual images, then process everything when it's done. Is there a particular scanner that folks recommend for doing this relatively quickly and easily? Ideally I'd like to have the capability of scanning prints as well, in cases where I have prints but no negatives. You can't do it 'relatively quickly and easily'. If you have very many, which it sounds like you do, it will be very time consuming no matter what equipment you choose. ray is right as rain: if you embark on such a project, be prepared to become a slave to it. Often worth it in the end, but wrenching drudgery when the excitement dies down. My recommendation, as usual, is to buy good equipment (to be resold at the end), learn to use it properly, and have an intern learn your techniques and choices. Make quality control checks from time to time, and revel in the hours /someone else/ is spending with your scanners. -- Frank ess |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Scanner for photos and film
On Nov 19, 5:13 pm, "Frank ess" wrote:
ray wrote: On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 03:57:12 -0600, Cams wrote: I'd like to go through my shoe boxes of photos and negatives and digitize them all. I'm looking for advice on the best way of going about this. I'm looking to scan everything, rather than cherry picking individual images, then process everything when it's done. Is there a particular scanner that folks recommend for doing this relatively quickly and easily? Ideally I'd like to have the capability of scanning prints as well, in cases where I have prints but no negatives. You can't do it 'relatively quickly and easily'. If you have very many, which it sounds like you do, it will be very time consuming no matter what equipment you choose. ray is right as rain: if you embark on such a project, be prepared to become a slave to it. Often worth it in the end, but wrenching drudgery when the excitement dies down. My recommendation, as usual, is to buy good equipment (to be resold at the end), learn to use it properly, and have an intern learn your techniques and choices. Make quality control checks from time to time, and revel in the hours /someone else/ is spending with your scanners. -- Frank ess I had this question a while back, and it appears that the use of a film scanner appears to be the best solution. However, it will cost money to get a decent film scanner. I recalled that the brand name of scanner which someone suggested was either a Canon FS4000 ($1000) or Nikon Coolscan (9000 ED is over $2000). In addition to the cost, there are other two major problems with film scanner: (1) 35mm film size is small, and any tiny dust of imperfections will be magnified (2) time involved - film negatives will be subjected to conversion to positive prints, and therefore will require skill similar to the old fashioned darkroom skill. Perhaps nowadays, it is much more automated and you did not play around with chemical agents. However, you need some knowledge about colour and therefore will end up doing things more that you planned to do. I was initially thinking about a cheap scanner, but I was advised against that and did not follow through. I ended up scanning colour prints in a cheap scanner. It is much cheaper, but still take time and quality is not that great. I did more than 1 regular postcard photo in one shot, and then crop them into the siez of the photos. I usually do it at 600 dpi or more, as the cropped image may be only a quarter of an 8x11 size or even less (if you crammed 6 postcard photos in the scanner screen of 8x11). I even wonder if it is still cheaper and less time if I just order the brand new prints from the negatives and then scanned the photos. It may end up cheaper than buying a $2000 scanner (plus extra time consumed). However, I have over 2000 photos to scan and if it cost $2 each, it will cost $4000!. It is amusing to note that if you ask the photo lab to get digital files when you order your prints, it only cost $2 more for the whole 36 photos. However, if it already cut into 6 strips, it is much more time for them to scan and get the digital files, and the technician has to insert them one strip at a time. Therefore the cost of $2 per photo. It is a time consuming job, either using regular print scanner or even more if you have to use a film scanner. Hope that this help. I never purchase that expensive Canon or Nikon film scanner. I heard that they are excellent, except expensive. Remember again.. a tiny speckle in a small size negative or a smudge will be magnified. Hoep that this help you. I do recall recently of an Epson V700 ($500) or V750 M Pro ($800), but I don't know whether they are as good as the more expensive Canon and Nikon film scanner. Note that there is another discussion in this same newsgroup about this same topic. Please read that one too. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Scanner for photos and film
wrote: On Nov 19, 5:13 pm, "Frank ess" wrote: My recommendation, as usual, is to buy good equipment (to be resold at the end), learn to use it properly, and have an intern learn your techniques and choices. Make quality control checks from time to time, and revel in the hours /someone else/ is spending with your scanners. Frank ess Sensible advice. Although finding an "intern" is probably impossibleg. I had this question a while back, and it appears that the use of a film scanner appears to be the best solution. However, it will cost money to get a decent film scanner. I recalled that the brand name of scanner which someone suggested was either a Canon FS4000 ($1000) or Nikon Coolscan (9000 ED is over $2000). Uh, no. If all you need is 35mm, the Nikon Coolscan V is excellent and is under US$600 new. The Canon 4000 is discontinued and the Nikon 9000 is expensive because it also scans medium format up to 56x86mm. In addition to the cost, there are other two major problems with film scanner: (1) 35mm film size is small, and any tiny dust of imperfections will be magnified This is only a problem with traditional B&W film, the ICE technology detects and fixes dust imperfections during scanning for color films and C41 process B&W films. (2) time involved - film negatives will be subjected to conversion to positive prints, and therefore will require skill similar to the old fashioned darkroom skill. It's not that bad. You get a positive image from the scanner. But you do have to adjust it. It's very similar to the adjustments required during raw conversion: black and white points, contrast, and color temperature adjustments, noise reduction, resampling to size for printing, and sharpening. Hope that this help. I never purchase that expensive Canon or Nikon film scanner. I heard that they are excellent, except expensive. Remember again.. a tiny speckle in a small size negative or a smudge will be magnified. Hoep that this help you. I do recall recently of an Epson V700 ($500) or V750 M Pro ($800), but I don't know whether they are as good as the more expensive Canon and Nikon film scanner. The Epsons are roughly the same price or a bit more than the Coolscan V, and not as good. But they can scan up to at least 4x5 film. David J. Littleboy Tokyo, Japan |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Film scanner | JohnM | Digital Photography | 7 | September 25th 06 04:00 AM |
Scanning Kodak 126 film with film/slide scanner | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 5 | June 13th 06 12:27 AM |
Is there a decent film scanner for 6x4.5 medium format film $500 or less? | Rick Baker | Digital Photography | 6 | March 17th 06 02:22 PM |
epson (or others) flat bed scanner vs film scanner | Albert Ma | Digital Photography | 1 | October 30th 04 03:39 AM |
FA: 35 mm Film Recorder and Film Scanner (starting at $1.00) | Armin B. | General Equipment For Sale | 2 | May 20th 04 12:04 AM |