Visit MPB Visit MPB Visit MPB

negatives to computer

Pwynnej
Posted 10/12/2010 - 15:16 Link
Good job you have the Z-1 rather than the Z-1p thoramay

I think the shutter noise/mirror clap on the Z-1p is louder than the Z-1, so it's no good for shooting birds or snooping and you might jump out of your skin
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
Stanovich
Posted 15/12/2010 - 22:49 Link
I have an Epson V500 scanner that I bought just over a year ago, and I've just finished transferring around 7000 images (slides and negatives) to the computer. The rationale was (a) there wouldn't be an extra cost to scanning once I'd bought the machine (other than my time), (b) it's a flatbed so has other uses, and (c) the scanner on my office printer no longer works with Windows Vista.

The quality is quite a lot better than Boots/Jessops CDs, but some way off K20D (or LX3) images regardless of resolution. Slides give better results than negatives, but that may just be the quirks of my particular scanner. Then there's the problem - despite gentle cleaning - of dust / hairs in the image, requiring some post-processing. I wouldn't print from a scan other than for a 'snap' for family or friends, though I've put some scanned images into pdf publications (half-A4 or smaller) and they aren't really distinguishable from digitals (and also used one for a calendar with the same result).

I rarely use my only film camera (an Olympus RC35), but still promise myself an MX or something similar having learned years ago on a fully manual SLR.
K5IIs & ME Super with FA24-90, DA17-70, DA55-300, misc old primes; Fuji X20.
johnriley
Posted 15/12/2010 - 23:25 Link
You're right about dust - it makes dust on digital sensors pale into insignificance.

Dust always was a problem with film.
Best regards, John
K10D
Posted 15/12/2010 - 23:37 Link
Quote:
That's the point, if we all took pictures the same way with the same camera life would be very boring!

I believe the medical term is Canonitis?

Best regards
Inspiration is rarer than a plate glass camera.....
Smeggypants
Posted 15/12/2010 - 23:46 Link
ChrisA wrote:
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!!

I wish I'd seen this thread earlier.


Like Chris I have 10,000 or so negatives from the last 25 years. I couldn't afford the Nikon, but I have the next best thing, a Plustek opticfilm 7500i - it cost about 250 new, and I've scanned probably around 2,000 negs with it so far. I have a long way to go.

The software that came with it was rubbish, so I use Vuescan, which comes with a whole load of film profiles.

The Plustek doesn't autofeed, but I don't mind, before moving on, I load each 16bit TIFF into Photpaint and clone out the scratches and other crap, before importing into Lightroom for any PP. it scans upto a real 7500 dpi. I scan at 3600 though which is more than enough for my 35mm negs and saves disc space and time

I am also lucky in that back in the day I diligently kept my negs all archived by dates and also kept diaries, so I know exactly when and where I took the shots.

Loads of work but what price memories.
[i]Bodies: 1x K-5IIs, 2x K-5, Sony TX-5, Nokia 808
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283
ChrisA
Posted 16/12/2010 - 00:11 Link
Well I salute those that put so much more effort into the job than I can be bothered to. I thought my solution was labour-intensive!

I know that I'd cross my own insanity threshold if I had to position each frame separately, and/or indeed clone the dust off every negative.



For the record, I couldn't afford the Nikon either, but that's what credit cards are for, right?
.
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)
.
SteveA
Posted 16/12/2010 - 20:22 Link
I have used both the Fuji & Ilford scanning service - but not since I bought the K-M in 2009!
All I can add to the discussion is that when Fuji 'switched' to a new lab in 2008 the quality was greatly improved.
This is a resized image I uploaded to Flickr:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/28204187@N08/4283954969/in/set-72157623109209463/

I believe its FUJI Provia400
Smeggypants
Posted 17/12/2010 - 00:43 Link
ChrisA wrote:
Well I salute those that put so much more effort into the job than I can be bothered to. I thought my solution was labour-intensive!

I know that I'd cross my own insanity threshold if I had to position each frame separately, and/or indeed clone the dust off every negative.



Viewscan uses the infrared crap cleaning system pretty well. Most of the dust is autocloned out automatically. As are most of the scratches.

Positioning each frame takes about 5 seconds.


Quote:

For the record, I couldn't afford the Nikon either, but that's what credit cards are for, right?

Then you could afford it
[i]Bodies: 1x K-5IIs, 2x K-5, Sony TX-5, Nokia 808
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283
tigershoot
Posted 19/12/2010 - 10:10 Link
I bought a Nikon Coolscan IV ED five years ago second hand on Ebay. Its ICE technology has to be seen to be believed, so there is almost no cloning in PS needed. I scanned thousands of slides and negs, popped it back on Ebay and sold it for MORE than I paid. These Nikon scanners are so collectable that they do not devalue - at least not at the moment anyway. The quality of the scans was high enough that I got some slide images accepted onto a major stock site.
K3iii, K3ii, K-5, K-x, DA150-450mm, DA16-85WR, DA16-45, DA18-55WR, DA18-135WR, DA35 F2.4, M100mm F4 Macro, DA55-300mm, FA50mm 1.4, AF360 Flash, AF540 Flash
Dannyc55
Posted 08/01/2011 - 08:01 Link
I use a HP G4050 Flatbed which will also scan negatives and transparencies up to 5"x4". Found it good for BW when I had an XP comp, but upgraded comp and use Windows 7 now and interface is more basic. Will scan optivally up to 9600dpi and 6x6 negs ,even at 2400dpi still give around 60mb files, 35mm about 24meg.

Add Comment

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