Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-28-2009, 08:43 PM   #31
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
Loyal Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 31,343
QuoteOriginally posted by Venturi Quote
Glad to hear you're liking the scanner, Steve. Did you buy the roll adapter and/or are you scanning full strips? Or are you pre-cutting your negs?

I'm still weighing the cost-vs-pain of going with the Nikon vs the Pacific Imaging.
I didn't get the bulk slide adapter (SF-210) or the roll film adapter (SA-30), though I did get the FH-3 film holder for single frames. Since all my current negatives are cut into strips of 4-6 frames, this will do for now. Once the unit goes off warranty, there is a hardware hack to enable the SA-21 negative strip adapter to scan full uncut rolls.

Steve

05-28-2009, 10:09 PM   #32
P67
Junior Member
P67's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: S. Ontario
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 30
Hello to all - new to these forums.

I have a Microtek I800. Not happy with it for slides - positives. I get distortion bands on astro photos along with funny coloured stars. White in the centre - blue on left side - red on right side.

It digs out shadow detail extremely well. Daytime shots are excellent - as well as B&W or from prints. Silverfast software is great.

Testing before buying is strongly recommended.
05-28-2009, 10:48 PM   #33
New Member




Join Date: May 2009
Location: Tokyo
Posts: 7
Anyone try "Scan Cafe"

I've got a boatload of negatives and slides to digitise...

I was considering Nikon Coolscan, but I can just imagine the time it would take to 'de-dust' each frame, scan, do preliminary touch ups.. etc... So I've begun to consider sending them out. Scan Cafe caught my eye. From 24 cents a frame.. they'll scan everything and present it to you over the web. Then you select what you actually want, so you only pay for the 'keepers'. This is great for me, as I had a habit of bracketing a fare bit and not throwing anything away.

Has anyone tried this or similar?

Paul
05-29-2009, 04:38 AM   #34
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,489
QuoteOriginally posted by pama123 Quote
I've got a boatload of negatives and slides to digitise...

I was considering Nikon Coolscan, but I can just imagine the time it would take to 'de-dust' each frame, scan, do preliminary touch ups.. etc... So I've begun to consider sending them out. Scan Cafe caught my eye. From 24 cents a frame.. they'll scan everything and present it to you over the web. Then you select what you actually want, so you only pay for the 'keepers'. This is great for me, as I had a habit of bracketing a fare bit and not throwing anything away.

Has anyone tried this or similar?

Paul
define boatload. I had 5000 slides and 15000 negatives.

the scanner I used (Minolta Dimage II) had a carrier for slides, 4 at a time, and a carrier for neg's, 6 at a time.

so you de-dust 6 at a time, and batch process them. while it might have taken 30-45 minutes to do the 6 frames, it really boiled down to a few minutes every hour.

took me 4 years but I scanned everything.

I still have the neg's and slides stored in archival pages so it I need to go back I can always re-scan. I have not found th e need yet.

I have heard of places in india that are as low as $.19 per frame, but think of the cost. 20,000 frames is still about $5,000

05-29-2009, 05:16 AM   #35
New Member




Join Date: May 2009
Location: Tokyo
Posts: 7
Scan Cafe

QuoteOriginally posted by Lowell Goudge Quote
define boatload. I had 5000 slides and 15000 negatives.
Thanks for the advice,
OK... so maybe it is more like a rowboat.... about 5,000 slides and another 2,000 negatives.

I guess it came down to my not wanting to go through the tedium of doing that processing... and knowing me, it would stretch out to 4 years or more even with that lower volume of slides/negs.

I made a guesstimate of about 5 minutes per frame, including the prep, scanning, naming and managing of the files themselves etc.. .and that works out to over 500 hours.

Doing that math, though, it does come out to a lot of extra money for shipping it out, even after you deduct the price of a good scanner...

Still thinking about it...
Paul
05-29-2009, 08:15 PM   #36
Forum Member




Join Date: May 2009
Location: Kitchener, Canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 79
Minolta Scanners

I have been using Minolta Dimage Elite 5400 film scanner for a few years now. I find there is a singificant difference in time between scanning slide and negs at the same settings. Slides generally take about 1/4 of the time it takes to scan negs. Have been shooting slide mostly since I bought the scanner.
The results are quite amazing, this thing will resolve down to the film's grain.
05-30-2009, 02:25 PM   #37
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
Loyal Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 31,343
Well, here is my first slide scan with the Coolscan 5000 ED:



Ricoh XR7 with Tamron 28/2.5 (02B), Kodachrome 64

I am pretty pleased with the results. On the 4000 dpi scan you can see the film's grain structure. That is impressive with Kodachrome.

Steve
06-03-2009, 06:07 PM   #38
Pentaxian
Clarkey's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Brampton, ON, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,924
I will say that using the Minolta 5400 Elite II is a bit slow. One other thing to consider (especially when trying to scan underexposed slides) is getting software to remove scan noise. I use Neat Image, which I have found to be excellent.

The minolta is capable of some good results, and the lab I bought it off only got rid of it due to the speed of scanning not being as quick as the coolscan.


(MZ-5N + 28-200mm 3.5-5.6 IF AL)

06-03-2009, 11:42 PM   #39
Veteran Member
OregonJim's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Willamette Valley, Oregon
Posts: 1,329
On the subject of scanners, I picked up a PrimeFilm 1800u film scanner for $3 at a yard sale. Before I go to the trouble of downloading drivers, does anyone think this thing will give decent results? I'm not familiar with the brand, but the model number kinda hints that it's only 1800ppi...
06-04-2009, 09:00 AM   #40
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
Loyal Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 31,343
QuoteOriginally posted by OregonJim Quote
On the subject of scanners, I picked up a PrimeFilm 1800u film scanner for $3 at a yard sale. Before I go to the trouble of downloading drivers, does anyone think this thing will give decent results? I'm not familiar with the brand, but the model number kinda hints that it's only 1800ppi...
PrimeFilm 1800u

Steve
06-09-2009, 06:50 PM   #41
Forum Member




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Roanoke, VA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 74
I develop B&W and scan myself with an Epson V500. Big savings over the long run, and you'll learn photo chemistry. It's a win/win. Color is another story.

Steve and Clarky: great photos! Check out those blue skies.
08-21-2009, 02:07 AM   #42
Inactive Account




Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: 300133, Romania
Posts: 104
@ Clarkey & Stevebrot: Wow! Those shots are perfect! Perfect colors, perfect detail and sharpnes... Everything perfect!

Now... I'm not sure if this is the right place to post, but here it is:

I use a CanoScan 4200F that can go up to 3200dpi, 48bits TIFF. I have the negative 35mm film pre-cut (4 frames) at the local Fuji lab that develops it.

Then... in the Canon software, I have the option to preview and scan as a batch of 4 frames, or frame-by-frame (with "calibrate at every scan" checked). What I found out is that the results are considerably different when using the two methods.

I unchecked the "descreen", "unsharp mask", "reduce dust and scratches" and "fading correction" buttons, and only left the "grain correction" at lowest... and yet! Calibrating / previewing / scanning for batch of 4 is huuuugely different from calibrating / previewing /scanning frame-by-frame.

So... if the scanner can induce such a level of "subjectivity", which then needs some amount of digital post-processing, then what's the point of shooting film?

(Before throwing any rocks, please note that 1. I love shooting film and I only exaggerated for the sake of argumentation, 2. I'm (desperately?)looking for tips in order to enhance my scanning work flow, in order to 3. use the lightroom and photoshop software at minimum).
08-21-2009, 07:24 AM   #43
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
Loyal Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 31,343
QuoteOriginally posted by MeFirstO Quote
@ Clarkey & Stevebrot: Wow! Those shots are perfect! Perfect colors, perfect detail and sharpnes... Everything perfect!

Now... I'm not sure if this is the right place to post, but here it is:

I use a CanoScan 4200F that can go up to 3200dpi, 48bits TIFF. I have the negative 35mm film pre-cut (4 frames) at the local Fuji lab that develops it.

Then... in the Canon software, I have the option to preview and scan as a batch of 4 frames, or frame-by-frame (with "calibrate at every scan" checked). What I found out is that the results are considerably different when using the two methods.

I unchecked the "descreen", "unsharp mask", "reduce dust and scratches" and "fading correction" buttons, and only left the "grain correction" at lowest... and yet! Calibrating / previewing / scanning for batch of 4 is huuuugely different from calibrating / previewing /scanning frame-by-frame.

So... if the scanner can induce such a level of "subjectivity", which then needs some amount of digital post-processing, then what's the point of shooting film?

(Before throwing any rocks, please note that 1. I love shooting film and I only exaggerated for the sake of argumentation, 2. I'm (desperately?)looking for tips in order to enhance my scanning work flow, in order to 3. use the lightroom and photoshop software at minimum).
If you were "batch" processing in the darkroom, you would use the same settings for each print and your results would reflect the care you put into the process.

The scanning/pp step is similar to things you could be doing in the darkroom. When scanning negatives or slides the issues of exposure, contrast, and color balance are part of the mix just as much as if the image was being projected onto paper with an enlarger. The main difference is that you have quite a bit more control with the scanner and pp software. This is particularly true in regards to contrast and color balance. One of the main reasons I gave up on color darkroom work was effort it took to get a decent print.

Steve
08-21-2009, 11:19 AM   #44
Pentaxian
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,820
Just got delivery a few days ago of a Coolscan 9000. I also have quite a few slides and negs that are sitting around deteriorating. The Coolscan does a terrific job of bringing them back, and it has no problems (so far) with Kodachrome. However, there is a learning curve, and this is slow going.

I originally thought I would scan to 16 bit Tiffs, but at 100megs a pop, I'll fill up some drives quickly. In all honesty, I have to say that most of my old slides do not merit that treatment. I may start with high quality JPEGS. then pp in PS, and if the slide is super, rescan to TIFF. Or I may just buy lots of USB hard drives.
08-21-2009, 12:45 PM   #45
Veteran Member
Gooshin's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Toronto, the one in Canada.
Posts: 5,611
QuoteOriginally posted by GeneV Quote
Just got delivery a few days ago of a Coolscan 9000. I also have quite a few slides and negs that are sitting around deteriorating. The Coolscan does a terrific job of bringing them back, and it has no problems (so far) with Kodachrome. However, there is a learning curve, and this is slow going.

I originally thought I would scan to 16 bit Tiffs, but at 100megs a pop, I'll fill up some drives quickly. In all honesty, I have to say that most of my old slides do not merit that treatment. I may start with high quality JPEGS. then pp in PS, and if the slide is super, rescan to TIFF. Or I may just buy lots of USB hard drives.
from a purist point of view, i would highly suggest you scan at maximum everything, then downsample as a batch through Photoshop, rather than scanning at lower settings.

PS, congrats on the scanner, it is a fine piece of technology.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
film, photography, print, prints, scan
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Outsourcing Film Scanning ... Dubesor Pentax Medium Format 20 07-16-2010 10:38 PM
Scanning MF film Macroguy Pentax Medium Format 32 05-20-2010 07:13 AM
Scanning the film pentagor Pentax Film SLR Discussion 24 12-18-2008 04:58 AM
Film scanning straightshooter Pentax Film SLR Discussion 7 09-09-2008 08:01 PM
Film scanning gear spe Photographic Technique 3 03-26-2008 02:58 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:41 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top