Visit MPB Visit MPB Visit MPB

negatives to computer

thoramay
Posted 09/12/2010 - 09:10 Link
Having given my film body a workout in this cold spell, I now need to put the results onto the computer. What options have I, please?
Can this be done commercially or do I need to source a film scanner? My printer/scanner is inadequate.
regards Thoramay
ChrisA
Posted 09/12/2010 - 09:33 Link
The cheapest way is to use a developing/printing organisation that, for a couple of quid extra, scans your negs at the same time, and gives you the scanned files back on a CD, along with the prints and negs. Some of them give you the option of not printing any of them, just developing and scanning, which is the cheapest of all.

If you've already had the film processed, it's more complicated and expensive, since the negs are now in strips.

High street photo shops tend to charge about 50p per frame for scanning after the event, so to speak, which makes a whole film very expensive.

I should declare my vested interest - some time back I sourced a dedicated film scanner (a Nikon Super Coolscan 5000 ED), in order to scan my collection of 10000 negs going back 25 years. I'm about 25% through that particular project!

As I've mentioned before, I'm happy to scan negs for forum people at much lower than high street prices, just to offset some of the substantial investment in the scanner itself. PM me if you're interested in this.

Plug aside, if you can get the scanning done when the film is first developed, it will be the cheapest option, I should think.
.
Pentax K-3, DA18-135, DA35 F2.4, DA17-70, DA55-300, FA28-200, A50 F1.7, A100 F4 Macro, A400 F5.6, Sigma 10-20 EXDC, 50-500 F4.5-6.3 APO DG OS Samsung flash SEF-54PZF(x2)
.
Edited by ChrisA: 09/12/2010 - 09:35
Dangermouse
Posted 09/12/2010 - 11:13 Link
You can buy a film scanner for around the £100 mark, it won't be as good as ChrisA's but it'll do a reasonable job. I have, however, noticed how much detail it loses from the slides I recently fed through it. I may well try to digitise them by projecting and then photographing with the K-m instead.

You can definitely buy slide copier attachments with a K mount, that might be worth a try? It's dead easy to flip positive/negative once you have the digital images and the slide frames are, after all, the same size as a 35mm one so they should fit although you might have to make a mask from black card to fill the space around the frame. Only thing I'm unsure of is whether you'd hit problems with the crop factor?
Matt

Shooting the Welsh Wilderness with K-m, KX, MX, ME Super and assorted lenses.
womble
Posted 09/12/2010 - 11:22 Link
I'd second the "get a CD made" option for any further films. They can be a bit variable so you might need to try different retailers. I find "The Darkroom UK" do an excellent job of my BW negs (both 35mm and 6x6) but the scans of my 6x6 Fuji Velvia images leave a lot to be desired. My guess is that Velvia has so much detail that the 8 bit jpegs just don't cut the mustard.

K.
Kris Lockyear
It is an illusion that photos are made with the camera… they are made with the eye, heart and head. Henri Cartier-Bresson
Lots of film bodies, a couple of digital ones, too many lenses (mainly older glass) and a Horseman LE 5x4.

My website
thoramay
Posted 09/12/2010 - 12:46 Link
You set out with all good intention to use your 35mm equipment and find it is not so simple.
I have been told at the Club last night that the cd system from the likes of Boots will not give results sufficient to take up to A4 for comp work.
Getting a reasonable scanner is simply not cost effective. My slide scanner is out on loan. Perhaps it was not such a good idea.. but I don't like the idea of just leaving the Z1 to languish in a drawer.
regards Thoramay.
Pwynnej
Posted 09/12/2010 - 13:43 Link
You have a slide scanner - I suppose you mean the tube which has camera on one end and a film holder on the other? I found the results were too contrasty when I tried it. Also depends on the light source. I don't recommend it.

I do recommend that you do save up your pennies for a scanner whether a dedicated slide scanner (eg a Coolscan) or a flatbed with a film holder. I was lucky to get one of the Coolscans for a reasonable price, but since Canon or Nikon have developed new scanners for eons, the chances of buying a new one is becoming limited.

I would suggest a used Canon, Nikon or Minolta 2700, 4000 or 5400 dedicated film scanner - using older 2700 machines on a newer comp might have compatability issues (eg with drivers) but I don't know how adept you are with computer wizardry. Despite having the kit below I do still get a lot of enjoyment out of my Z1, slide and black and white, then scanning them in - the quality I get from my coolscan is way ahead of those I could envisage from the high street....

Don't give up!
Z-1p, K-1, P50
F50 1.7. SMC-FAs 24, 35, 50 1.4, 85, 135. HD-FA15-30, DFA24-70, D-FA*70-200. The SMC-FA Limited Trinity.
Metz 45 CL-4, AF500FTZ. AF540FGZ.
Some Mamiya and some Nikon
womble
Posted 09/12/2010 - 14:26 Link
thoramay wrote:
You set out with all good intention to use your 35mm equipment and find it is not so simple.
I have been told at the Club last night that the cd system from the likes of Boots will not give results sufficient to take up to A4 for comp work.
Getting a reasonable scanner is simply not cost effective. My slide scanner is out on loan. Perhaps it was not such a good idea.. but I don't like the idea of just leaving the Z1 to languish in a drawer.
regards Thoramay.

Higher res scans from "the Darkroom" will print to A4 quite happily.

K.
Kris Lockyear
It is an illusion that photos are made with the camera… they are made with the eye, heart and head. Henri Cartier-Bresson
Lots of film bodies, a couple of digital ones, too many lenses (mainly older glass) and a Horseman LE 5x4.

My website
Dangermouse
Posted 09/12/2010 - 15:04 Link
My scanner produces 2400x1600 JPGs, which print ok up to A4. Whether they're "competition standard" I don't know, but they look pretty decent hanging on the wall!
Matt

Shooting the Welsh Wilderness with K-m, KX, MX, ME Super and assorted lenses.
thoramay
Posted 09/12/2010 - 17:26 Link
Matt. You don't mention which scanner you have and the likely cost to purchase this unit.
Searching the web brings up scanners at £50-£70. I am somewhat sceptical of the claims made and the 'reviews' of users.
As this is somewhat a new venture, I really want to see the results of my first effort with the Z1 before I commit to any outlay. I do have a club member who is going to scan the negatives for me. I understand that the scanning of 36 negatives is a lengthy process and would not want to beholden to a club member for ever. So it is a wait and see.
regards Thoramay.
Hardgravity
Posted 09/12/2010 - 17:33 Link
You could try one of these, CLICKY LINK.

They have a 5 meg sensor and I use an older version for my 35mm negs. Maplins also do a cheaper scanner but I don't know how good it is.

Hope that helps.
Cheers, HG

K110+DA40, K200+DA35, K3 and a bag of lenses, bodies and other bits.

Mustn't forget the Zenits, or folders, or...

PPG entries.
ChrisA
Posted 09/12/2010 - 17:35 Link
thoramay wrote:
I understand that the scanning of 36 negatives is a lengthy process and would not want to beholden to a club member for ever.

The staggeringly high level of admin associated with scanning large numbers of negatives is exactly why the cheap scanner options are no good at all if you have more than a handful to do.

Scanning 5 negs is a world apart from scanning 5000, trust me.

I've done nearly 3000, and with the Coolscan, what you're paying for (over £1k in my case, bought from the USA) is convenience, as much as anything else. A roll takes me about an hour elapsed, and only a few seconds of actual effort every 7 mins to feed the thing another strip.

And I'm lucky enough to have all the negs superbly organised already (not by me!!).

Then there's all the hard disk space for storing and backing up the 70MB TIFFs that come out.

If you're going to do lots of film work, use a lab that gives you TIFF files rather than JPEGs after they do the scanning.

But it ain't cheap. We've forgotten how expensive it all was with film!!
.
Pentax K-3, DA18-135, DA35 F2.4, DA17-70, DA55-300, FA28-200, A50 F1.7, A100 F4 Macro, A400 F5.6, Sigma 10-20 EXDC, 50-500 F4.5-6.3 APO DG OS Samsung flash SEF-54PZF(x2)
.
Dangermouse
Posted 09/12/2010 - 17:43 Link
Mine is very much like HG's link, although they no longer stock the precise model I have. It's an ION "Film 2 SD" and came with carriers for negatives, slides, and roll film (only accepts 35mm though, and probably 110 slides in the proper mounts).
Matt

Shooting the Welsh Wilderness with K-m, KX, MX, ME Super and assorted lenses.
matwhittington
Posted 09/12/2010 - 18:05 Link
Is the film processed yet? and is it colour or B/W? I only ask because I was just inspired to run through a couple of films this week, and I am trying out the ilford lab on the web. I think they only process balck and white, but it can be any brand of film; and there are options to just get the negs developed, or gets the negs and prints, or the negs and scans (at high resolution if desired - I think at least 3000 x 3000), or even negs, prints and scans... Not sure that it is the cheapest but at least it seems comprehensive (if you want black and white).

Their website is here:
link

Depending on the results I shall either run off a film or two every now and then, and bear the cost, or just put the camera back in the drawer

Don't know if that helps at all

EDIT: P.S I should point out that I haven't actually seen the results yet so I am not specifically endorsing.

Regards
Mat W

My Flickr: link
Edited by matwhittington: 09/12/2010 - 18:08
thoramay
Posted 09/12/2010 - 18:18 Link
Having just read a very comprehensive review of scanners and the stark warning never to even begin, even with a flat bed scanner costing £250 plus the added cost of the software about the same, I think my Z1 will only see the inside of a drawer.
If the cost and the quality cannot match a digital camera then there is no point, to my way of thinking, of dwelling in the past with old technology.
The effort must be able to match my desire for quality.
If the review, and it is a well thought of review site, states clearly that they cannot match digital quality with all their expertise then I certainly do not want to end up frustrated with results.
Ah Well!! it was a good idea that ends up being not so.
regards Thoramay.
ChrisA
Posted 09/12/2010 - 18:41 Link
thoramay wrote:
If the cost and the quality cannot match a digital camera then there is no point, to my way of thinking, of dwelling in the past with old technology.

I think you have it exactly right.
Quote:

The effort must be able to match my desire for quality.

Or you need a special reason.

In my case, I have 10,000 negatives, and no prints. It's my whole photographic life from when I first got my Super A in about 1984.

Snaps, most of them, but what price all those memories? I have absolutely no regrets about getting the Nikon, and I'm convinced it's the only practical solution.

Heyho, 7000 to go...
.
Pentax K-3, DA18-135, DA35 F2.4, DA17-70, DA55-300, FA28-200, A50 F1.7, A100 F4 Macro, A400 F5.6, Sigma 10-20 EXDC, 50-500 F4.5-6.3 APO DG OS Samsung flash SEF-54PZF(x2)
.

Add Comment

To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.