[grainbelt]

Trying to help my father digitize thirty years of family photos. There is a five-year period where everything was taken on 110 film, and we have all the negatives.

Are there any reasonably affordable negative scanners on the market that can work with 110? I know 35mm negative scanners are everywhere, the ones that can handle 110 seem to be around a thousand dollars (yikes!).

The local commercial developers he's talked to want upwards of $3/frame, which seems absurd.

[Canada_Rockies]

Trying to help my father digitize thirty years of family photos. There is a five-year period where everything was taken on 110 film, and we have all the negatives.

Are there any reasonably affordable negative scanners on the market that can work with 110? I know 35mm negative scanners are everywhere, the ones that can handle 110 seem to be around a thousand dollars (yikes!).

The local commercial developers he's talked to want upwards of $3/frame, which seems absurd.

Why not use a 35mm scanner and crop the results? I have a really cheap scanner that works well enough for basic prints. It cost me something like $250 - no doubt you can get better for less 10 years later.

[bobpur]

Have you got a Macro lens or a good 50mm and macro tubes ?
You can make a simple backlight table and take photos of them, works with any size neg or slide.
Done hundreds like that.

[wildweasel]

This might give you some ideas; similar to bobpur's suggestion. Scanning Film Negatives With A DSLR - A Maker's Guide | DIYPhotography.net

[grainbelt]

Why not use a 35mm scanner and crop the results? I have a really cheap scanner that works well enough for basic prints. It cost me something like $250 - no doubt you can get better for less 10 years later.

My understanding is that the software would crop the strips of negatives incorrectly, or I'd have to trick it into scanning as one image and manually crop each one. Hundreds of times.

As for taking a picture of the negatives with a DSLR, I sold mine, and have no interest in acquiring another. Strangely, I'm shooting film again.

[tuco]

...
As for taking a picture of the negatives with a DSLR, I sold mine, and have no interest in acquiring another. Strangely, I'm shooting film again.

For that small of a negative, taking a picture with a DSLR would just be a trade off of scanning time or image editor time reversing the image and trying to remove the film base color (in the case of a color neg) I suspect.

[wildman]

Are there any reasonably affordable negative scanners on the market that can work with 110?

The long and short of it is - no.

I'd have to trick it into scanning as one image and manually crop each one. Hundreds of times.

I tried this method on my Epson V600. I didn't find it a big deal to do it this way. I can specify the size of the crop marquee to exactly what I want and set it over multiple images.

Not having any 110 I tried it on 35mm and it worked fine. I crammed in as many film strips as I could and ran preview. Then dropped the crop marquee on whatever I wanted to scan, hit scan, and it gave me in this case 18 separate files just as intended. Of course with 110 you would have the advantage of being able to crop out and scan maybe 50 or more images at a time.

I don't know what your tolerance is for this sort of work but I didn't find it a big deal.

---

Last edited by wildman; 09-06-2012 at 01:06 PM.

[aurele]

I'd have to trick it into scanning as one image and manually crop each one. Hundreds of times.

I tried this method on my Epson V600. I didn't find it a big deal to do it this way. I can specify the size of the crop marquee to exactly what I want and set it over multiple images.

I've scanned around 25 110 neg. with the CanoScan 9000F, with this strategie : preview the scan area, then select each "area" of each picture manually (with a selection a bit bigger than what i really want), scan.

While you scan new pictures, you can crop the pictures already scanned.

I do that with 135 films, take me around 30min to scan, crop, and tweak every picture for 36 exposure.
(My scanner take 2*6 frames in 135. With 110 count that you can do probably 20 frames per scanning, i guess.)

Remember that before putting the film in the scanned, take a look at the neg. to make sure you don't scan picture that are useless like totally burned one, of blurry, etc ... You will gain lots of time.

If you plan to digitalize a lot of picture, scanner can be a good option. Specially if you have multiple format like 110 / 120 / 135.

[dean45]

I have scanned some 16mm Minolta & 110 negative film with a Nikon Super Cool Scan 5000 scanner. I found that 35mm slide mounts cardboard or plastic would
not hold the film in place or flat enough to scan. I got some slide mount with glass. I put one together with guides in side to take the 16mm film.
The B&W Minolta negatives were good enough to scan at 2400 to 3200 dot per inch for the best ones, The Pocket Instamatic 10 negatives were good
for 1200-2000 dpi. (This was not a very good camera). The Pocket Instamatic 40 negatives (Kodak Gold 200) were good for 3200-4000dpi.
I don't believe the cheap $100-200 scanners or macro lens in front of your camera can match the resolution of the best 110 cameras.
I did however have a problem with Newton's rings on a few of my scans.

dean45

[LesDMess]

I scanned my collection of 110 film with the Coolscan 5000 and 4000dpi scans result in about 2600 X 2000 pixels cropped images. Each frame takes about 10 seconds to scan with ICE. I used the FH-3 filmholder and pinched the strip so that the whole frame is within the 35mm window as shown below.





Below is an example of what a scan from 110 Kodacolor film shot from a plastic Instamatic.



Link to full res -> http://www.fototime.com/65064B66AE212C6/orig.jpg

[grainbelt]

Excellent idea with the slide adapter, I'll have to dig into this a bit more.

[mzsaunders]

Does anyone have any experience of a device sold by Lomography called a 'Digitalizer 110? It's a 110 frame for use on a flatbed scanner - I might give one a try. I just processed a roll of Orca 110 and am struggling with scanning it. My Canon 8400F doesn't recognise the film size and my attempt at photographing the negs produced 'interesting' results.

[G and T]

Does anyone have any experience of a device sold by Lomography called a 'Digitalizer 110? It's a 110 frame for use on a flatbed scanner - I might give one a try. I just processed a roll of Orca 110 and am struggling with scanning it. My Canon 8400F doesn't recognise the film size and my attempt at photographing the negs produced 'interesting' results.

I recently scanned some 110 film for a friend and the only way I could get really good results was to put the negs in some old 110 slide mounts and then scan them in the slide holder of my dedicated 35mm scanner.
My Epson V700 flatbed was unable to get decent results no matter how I mounted the negs.
Glenn

[Richard Briggs]

I have an old Epson Perfection 3170 Photo which is equipped for 35mm slides and negs. But, if you 'disable thumbnails' in the scanning interface software (Epson Scan) the scanner preview-scans the whole platen. It will scan anything as long as its smaller than A4. You then select the area you want to scan (i.e. your negative which you have placed on the platten) using the marquee tool and set the output as normal. I have scanned glass plate negatives and slides from the 1900s this way and have generated superb quality scans. Don't make the mistake of thinking the black plastic cutaways have to be used. They are just for the generation of thumbnails.

Richard

[stevebrot]

Great tip Richard. This is a general feature of Epson Scan that is not immediately obvious, but is very, very helpful for any negatives where spacing or dimensions are not standard or consistent.


Steve