Phillip Cohen
(K=10561) - Comment Date 11/24/2004
|
Khozema,
See if you can find a real film scanner to use. 35mm film is kind of small and will probably not do well on a typical flatbed scanner. I use an old Nikon LS-2000 film scanner to scan my 35mm slides and negatives and the results are fine.
If you are limited to a flatbed scanner, scan the negative at the maximum native resolution of the scanner, not the interpolated resolution. You can then adjust the image size and color correct in Photoshop or some other editing program.
Phil
|
|
|
|
Phillip Cohen
(K=10561) - Comment Date 11/24/2004
|
Oh yes, also I forgot to mention. If the native resolution of your scanner is below about 1200 dpi, then you will not get a very good scan no matter what if scanning a 35mm neg. The detail will just not be there.
Phil
|
|
|
|
Egemen Kavak
(K=85) - Comment Date 11/30/2004
|
I never touch the negatives. Here, there are studios that directly record the images on a compact disc after processing the film.
|
|
|
|
Andew Gondokusumo
(K=833) - Comment Date 11/30/2004
|
I scanned my photograph at the maximum optical resolution at 2400 dpi, but what I get is a very grainy image and when I print it on A3 paper I get a very bad color reproduction and grainy.
|
|
|
|
Stan Pustylnik
(K=6768) - Comment Date 11/30/2004
|
If you will scan slide or negative film yourself you will have full control over scanner settings. Scanner settings could be same different as exposure settings on your camera. Sometime people in photo labs are scanning slides very nasty. And also bigger resolution you will select better, natural your images will look like. Faster you will scan for yourself, faster you will know how good you are in photography... :)
If you are student, try university libraries, they have slide-film scanners. If not, try ebay to buy scanner. My Nikon CoolScan III is doing outstanding job.
|
|
|
|
James Grogan
(K=119) - Comment Date 12/14/2004
|
I scan my 35 mm negatives and slides on an Epson Perfection 2450 Photo scanner. I scan at 2400 dpi although I can go up to 3400 dpi if I need to. I have been very pleased with it and the quality has been good enough for me to sell prints made from scans. I saved quite a bit of money by buying it as a refurbished unit from the Epson web site. Their refurbished units have their full new product warranty.
|
|
|
|
RENE VILLAROMAN
(K=121) - Comment Date 1/2/2005
|
I used to be bothered by the fact that, right now, digital slr cameras are still way up there in prices. So to solve my dilemma, I have all my color and black-and-white films processed and scanned into compact disks. That way I can have prints as well as digital scans. If I need prints, I just ask for 4 x 6 prints, and if I intend to print in my dry darkroom-that is Epson color inkjet printer--i just ask for scans on CDs. That way I have the best of both worlds. Byt that way, I use two SLRs--a Nikon F100 and N80 with several lenses. My initial investment in film photography equipment would equal the price of at least one Digital SLR sytem.
|
|
|
|
RENE VILLAROMAN
(K=121) - Comment Date 1/2/2005
|
I used to be bothered by the fact that, right now, digital slr cameras are still way up there in prices. So to solve my dilemma, I have all my color and black-and-white films processed and scanned into compact disks. That way I can have prints as well as digital scans. If I need prints, I just ask for 4 x 6 prints, and if I intend to print in my dry darkroom-that is Epson color inkjet printer--i just ask for scans on CDs. That way I have the best of both worlds. By the way, I use two SLRs--a Nikon F100 and N80,with several lenses, and a Haselblad 500 CM with a normal lens. My initial investment in film photography equipment would equal the price of at least one extensive Digital SLR system.
|
|
|
|
Mrinmoy Nag
(K=1050) - Comment Date 1/30/2005
|
Try Minolta dimage II . I'm sure Nikons are better. But this one is economical(<$250) and works great.
Or if you've an older operating system (windows 98 etc) you can try ebay, people sell many older version film scanner there.
|
|
|
|
Martin Halley
(K=580) - Comment Date 1/30/2005
|
If you buy a film scanner (Ebay is best, $200 buys a pretty good scanner these days) be sure to get one that has at least 2,500dpi resolution. The Minolta Dual Scan II is pretty good, that's what I use and am totally happy with it.
When scanning scanning negatives do NOT use the scanner's setting for negatives, it is much better to use the slide film setting and then invert the image in your photo software (Photoshop, PhotoImpact, etc.). I don't know why this is but everyone who has tried it confirms that the results are much better, regardless of make of scanner.
The scans from a photolab are not suitable for anything bigger than 6x4ins prints. They typically scan at 720dpi. but they quote the scan lines for the entire width of the negative which is very misleading.
|
|
|
|
Amitava Banerjea
(K=7088) - Comment Date 1/31/2005
|
Commercial photolab scans are low resolution jobs that will not satisfy a serious photographer. Also, I was dissatisfied with their settings and the resulting scans which sometimes came out too dark or with an undesireable color cast.
Some flatbed scanners come with a negative/slide scanning attachment, but even these only achieve rather low resolutions. In my opinion a real film scanner is a much better option, the best really, short of a commercial drum scanner. I use a Nikon Coolscan IV ED and am quite satisfied.
However, you must realize that while running your own scans gives you more control, that comes with a price, not just in dollar terms. Film scanners have come down in cost, but the real price, IMO, is in the time and effort it takes to run the scan. So you have to make a choice - settle for the convenience but lower resolution of a commercial photolab's scan, or put in the time and effort to do your own.
|
|
|
|
Gary Marx
(K=716) - Comment Date 6/1/2005
|
I think it has already been mentioned, but some (maybe most) labs now offer photo cd's with your order. Usually they run an extra $3-5. I haven't experienced any problems when I allow the lab to put the pics on cd at processing.
I bought a nice, HP scanner with negative and slide attachments, but turns out to be a waste of money unless the glass is CRYSTAL clear, and even then the quality isn't the same.
|
|
|
|
