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
|
|||
|
|||
Are film scanners any good?
Hey,
I am considering buying a film SLR and a film scanner. The idea is to use the film scanner to avoid costs of printing shots. So I can scan and see the pics and then ask the lab to print only a few off each roll that I like. At this point, let me make it clear that dSLRs are WAY beyond my budget. But my concern is about scanning colour negatives (thats what most of us prosumers use, right?). I've read that scanning colour negatives requires scanners worth thousands of dollars due to the orange mask. Given that I can't afford thousands of dollars worth of scanner and will use the regular Konica/Kodak colour film, should I ditch the scanner path? And any reviews on the Epson Perfection 2580? Thanks, Siddhartha |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
John Doe wrote:
Hey, I am considering buying a film SLR and a film scanner. The idea is to use the film scanner to avoid costs of printing shots. So I can scan and see the pics and then ask the lab to print only a few off each roll that I like. At this point, let me make it clear that dSLRs are WAY beyond my budget. But my concern is about scanning colour negatives (thats what most of us prosumers use, right?). I've read that scanning colour negatives requires scanners worth thousands of dollars due to the orange mask. Given that I can't afford thousands of dollars worth of scanner and will use the regular Konica/Kodak colour film, should I ditch the scanner path? And any reviews on the Epson Perfection 2580? Thanks, Siddhartha All film scanners I know of have software that compensates for orange masks, and most allow for different film types to get optimum color balance direct from the scanner. The scanner removes the mask and inverts the image to a positive automatically. Of course, for best results you will probably have to tweak color balance, contrast, brightness, etc in a program like Photoshop or similar. A film scanner like an Acer/Benq Scanwit, Nikon LS2000, Minolta DImage, etc. that will give about 2,700 dpi is adequate for your intended purpose, and you wil probably pick one up on Ebay for around $200. But, having said that, your idea of using the scanner simply to select negs you want to print doesn't sound like a good idea. Scanners are slow, like about 45 seconds to a minute or so for each negative. A better idea would be to buy or make a light-box on which you can view your negs with a loupe, or magnifier. With practice you can read negs quite well, and a lot faster than a scanner. Maybe you could rethink your decision to go with a film camera and scanner combo. A used D30 on Ebay seems to be around $600 - $700, and would save you buying a scanner and an older camera. By the time you factor in film and processing costs over a year or two, there probably isn't much difference in going digital from the outset. Good luck in whatever you choose to do, Colin D. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
John Doe wrote:
Hey, I am considering buying a film SLR and a film scanner. The idea is to use the film scanner to avoid costs of printing shots. So I can scan and see the pics and then ask the lab to print only a few off each roll that I like. At this point, let me make it clear that dSLRs are WAY beyond my budget. But my concern is about scanning colour negatives (thats what most of us prosumers use, right?). I've read that scanning colour negatives requires scanners worth thousands of dollars due to the orange mask. Given that I can't afford thousands of dollars worth of scanner and will use the regular Konica/Kodak colour film, should I ditch the scanner path? And any reviews on the Epson Perfection 2580? Thanks, Siddhartha All film scanners I know of have software that compensates for orange masks, and most allow for different film types to get optimum color balance direct from the scanner. The scanner removes the mask and inverts the image to a positive automatically. Of course, for best results you will probably have to tweak color balance, contrast, brightness, etc in a program like Photoshop or similar. A film scanner like an Acer/Benq Scanwit, Nikon LS2000, Minolta DImage, etc. that will give about 2,700 dpi is adequate for your intended purpose, and you wil probably pick one up on Ebay for around $200. But, having said that, your idea of using the scanner simply to select negs you want to print doesn't sound like a good idea. Scanners are slow, like about 45 seconds to a minute or so for each negative. A better idea would be to buy or make a light-box on which you can view your negs with a loupe, or magnifier. With practice you can read negs quite well, and a lot faster than a scanner. Maybe you could rethink your decision to go with a film camera and scanner combo. A used D30 on Ebay seems to be around $600 - $700, and would save you buying a scanner and an older camera. By the time you factor in film and processing costs over a year or two, there probably isn't much difference in going digital from the outset. Good luck in whatever you choose to do, Colin D. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
John Doe wrote:
Hey, I am considering buying a film SLR and a film scanner. The idea is to use the film scanner to avoid costs of printing shots. So I can scan and see the pics and then ask the lab to print only a few off each roll that I like. At this point, let me make it clear that dSLRs are WAY beyond my budget. But my concern is about scanning colour negatives (thats what most of us prosumers use, right?). I've read that scanning colour negatives requires scanners worth thousands of dollars due to the orange mask. Given that I can't afford thousands of dollars worth of scanner and will use the regular Konica/Kodak colour film, should I ditch the scanner path? And any reviews on the Epson Perfection 2580? Thanks, Siddhartha All film scanners I know of have software that compensates for orange masks, and most allow for different film types to get optimum color balance direct from the scanner. The scanner removes the mask and inverts the image to a positive automatically. Of course, for best results you will probably have to tweak color balance, contrast, brightness, etc in a program like Photoshop or similar. A film scanner like an Acer/Benq Scanwit, Nikon LS2000, Minolta DImage, etc. that will give about 2,700 dpi is adequate for your intended purpose, and you wil probably pick one up on Ebay for around $200. But, having said that, your idea of using the scanner simply to select negs you want to print doesn't sound like a good idea. Scanners are slow, like about 45 seconds to a minute or so for each negative. A better idea would be to buy or make a light-box on which you can view your negs with a loupe, or magnifier. With practice you can read negs quite well, and a lot faster than a scanner. Maybe you could rethink your decision to go with a film camera and scanner combo. A used D30 on Ebay seems to be around $600 - $700, and would save you buying a scanner and an older camera. By the time you factor in film and processing costs over a year or two, there probably isn't much difference in going digital from the outset. Good luck in whatever you choose to do, Colin D. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Thanks for the info, Colin. Two problems, I am not in the US (am in
India) so can't avail all the cheap stuff going on sale on eBay Two, is that I don't have US$600-700. I will probably spend approx US$250 buying a Canon 300V (Thats Rebel Ti for you) this month and another US$150 next month on the scanner. And then will add a 50mm lens to the kit. After spending ~6400-700+ on any single piece equipment, I would be worried all the time about damaging it. Btw, I already have a Olympus C-750. I want an SLR so I can learn more. Thanks again, Siddhartha |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
John Doe wrote:
Hey, I am considering buying a film SLR and a film scanner. The idea is to use the film scanner to avoid costs of printing shots. So I can scan and see the pics and then ask the lab to print only a few off each roll that I like. At this point, let me make it clear that dSLRs are WAY beyond my budget. But my concern is about scanning colour negatives (thats what most of us prosumers use, right?). I've read that scanning colour negatives requires scanners worth thousands of dollars due to the orange mask. Given that I can't afford thousands of dollars worth of scanner and will use the regular Konica/Kodak colour film, should I ditch the scanner path? And any reviews on the Epson Perfection 2580? Assuming you're not posting this for the fun of it (and fungus and X700 posts come to mind...) all dedicated film scanners, regardless of price come with s/w that is fully aware of the orange mask and compensate for it. Some flatbeds used to scan film have had problems in this regard according to some. A basic Minolta, Nikon or Canon film scanner in the 300 - $500 range will do the job quite well. Google away and you will find a lot on the scanner in question. Google groups on comp.periphs.scanners would be of benefit too. Films such as Kodak Portra 160NC scan beautifully. Some films are harder to get the colour right. Alan -- -- rec.photo.equipment.35mm user resource: -- http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.-- |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
John Doe wrote:
Hey, I am considering buying a film SLR and a film scanner. The idea is to use the film scanner to avoid costs of printing shots. So I can scan and see the pics and then ask the lab to print only a few off each roll that I like. At this point, let me make it clear that dSLRs are WAY beyond my budget. But my concern is about scanning colour negatives (thats what most of us prosumers use, right?). I've read that scanning colour negatives requires scanners worth thousands of dollars due to the orange mask. Given that I can't afford thousands of dollars worth of scanner and will use the regular Konica/Kodak colour film, should I ditch the scanner path? And any reviews on the Epson Perfection 2580? Assuming you're not posting this for the fun of it (and fungus and X700 posts come to mind...) all dedicated film scanners, regardless of price come with s/w that is fully aware of the orange mask and compensate for it. Some flatbeds used to scan film have had problems in this regard according to some. A basic Minolta, Nikon or Canon film scanner in the 300 - $500 range will do the job quite well. Google away and you will find a lot on the scanner in question. Google groups on comp.periphs.scanners would be of benefit too. Films such as Kodak Portra 160NC scan beautifully. Some films are harder to get the colour right. Alan -- -- rec.photo.equipment.35mm user resource: -- http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.-- |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
The problem is than an inexpensive camera like the Canon can yield excellent
results but you will not see them unless you have a reasonable quality scanner. For flatbeds you need to go up a notch or two on the Epson product ladder to get a flatbed scanner that does a reasonable job with negatives. Once you see how the process works you will be very unhappy if you do not have a half-way decent scanner. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
The problem is than an inexpensive camera like the Canon can yield excellent
results but you will not see them unless you have a reasonable quality scanner. For flatbeds you need to go up a notch or two on the Epson product ladder to get a flatbed scanner that does a reasonable job with negatives. Once you see how the process works you will be very unhappy if you do not have a half-way decent scanner. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
The problem is than an inexpensive camera like the Canon can yield excellent
results but you will not see them unless you have a reasonable quality scanner. For flatbeds you need to go up a notch or two on the Epson product ladder to get a flatbed scanner that does a reasonable job with negatives. Once you see how the process works you will be very unhappy if you do not have a half-way decent scanner. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
thought's on Pacific Image Film Scanners - Like the PF3650U has anyone | Mike Koperskinospam | 35mm Photo Equipment | 7 | August 9th 04 04:02 AM |
below $1000 film vs digital | Mike Henley | Medium Format Photography Equipment | 182 | June 25th 04 03:37 AM |
M/F film scanners - again? | Rod | Medium Format Photography Equipment | 17 | May 31st 04 04:14 PM |