Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-14-2009, 02:55 PM   #1
Site Supporter




Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Wilmore, KY
Posts: 349
How Do You Post Film Pictures?

So...I started off in the 1970's with a K1000 and a Vivitar zoom...and film...I'm loving digital but wanting to play with film.

Processing: do you get traditional negatives and prints, or negatives and digital prints?

For sharing online, do you just scan your prints, or do you buy the digital prints and post those?

Thanks in advance!

03-14-2009, 03:55 PM   #2
Inactive Account




Join Date: May 2008
Location: Edmonton, Canada
Posts: 322
I think most colour prints are digital now, so no real options unless you find a specialist. Most corner labs will do B&W on colour paper, so you need to find a pro lab for optical printing.

I scan my negs, tweak them in the computer and post those. Way better quality than scanning a print.

If you don't have a film scanner, I guess buying 'digital' prints would be the same things (minilab scans). It's cheaper to have labs scan when they process your film; if you bring in developed negs they'll charge more.
03-14-2009, 04:18 PM   #3
Veteran Member
Mike Cash's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Japan
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,952
I have my negatives developed and specify no prints. I then scan the negatives using a CanoScan 8800F flatbed scanner and VueScan and subsequently run them through Lightroom.
03-14-2009, 05:53 PM   #4
Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 26,158
I have my negatives scanned to CD by the lab when I have the film processed and skip the prints. I then do any needed adjustments in Lightroom before reducing the dimensions to forum standards before uploading them to the Web.

The machine scans are generally OK, though I am sure I could get better results if I had my own dedicated film scanner. I just have to find one that I can afford!

Steve

03-14-2009, 05:55 PM   #5
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,915
i get my lab to scan to a CD, however i noticed those scans are much inferior to scans that i've done on a real film scanner (Nikon Coolscan) in terms of resolution and dynamic range. however, usually the accuracy of the colours from the machine scans are very good.
03-14-2009, 09:59 PM   #6
Veteran Member
SuperAkuma's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bay Area, CA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 445
QuoteOriginally posted by k100d Quote
i get my lab to scan to a CD, however i noticed those scans are much inferior to scans that i've done on a real film scanner (Nikon Coolscan) in terms of resolution and dynamic range. however, usually the accuracy of the colours from the machine scans are very good.
I've noticed the same thing when I scan my neg on my $100 canon scanner. The Nikon coolscan that we have at school does a lot better job. Even though the Nikon does a lot better job, my $100 canon does the job for turning neg into digital to show online.

If you want to digitally archive your neg and want the best quality, spend the money on a good scanner.
03-16-2009, 08:23 PM   #7
Forum Member




Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Pleasanton, CA
Posts: 68
QuoteOriginally posted by Mike Cash Quote
I have my negatives developed and specify no prints. I then scan the negatives using a CanoScan 8800F flatbed scanner and VueScan and subsequently run them through Lightroom.
Hi Mike, I ordered one of those last week - they seem to be on back order all over the US. Are you happy with the output or does it take a lot of post processing to get there ?

Longer term, I am toying with the idea of buying an old enlarger for the body and lens, building up a 6 color LED head (for color mixing) and using the scanner like electronic print paper. No idea if it will work, but might be fun.
03-17-2009, 03:14 AM   #8
Veteran Member
Mike Cash's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Japan
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,952
I'm happy with the output. But the only thing I have to compare it to is the piece of crap Epson I had that was a couple of generations out of date. The main feature I like about it is the "cold" scanning light (don't have to wait for it to warm up before use).

03-17-2009, 06:31 AM   #9
Veteran Member
artobest's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Swansea, Wales
Posts: 455
I have a 8600F, which I assume isn't that different from Mike's 8800F. Compared to my Konica Minolta Dimage ScanDual IV (god I hate typing out that name), the output is relatively soft and the colours somewhat muted, even with Vuescan and Silverfast (although Silverfast is better than the Canon software that comes with it). I just don't think you can beat a dedicated film scanner, even an older one like mine (which by the way has much better neg and slide holders, and comes with pretty decent software).
03-17-2009, 07:02 AM   #10
Veteran Member
Gooshin's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Toronto, the one in Canada.
Posts: 5,611
dedicated scanners have autofocus and less glass between the scanner element and the negative.

the scanner will try to focus on the grain, giving you the best result possible (just like using a grain viewer while using an enlarger versus eyeballing the sharpness)
03-17-2009, 07:16 AM   #11
Veteran Member
Venturi's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Tulsa, OK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,639
QuoteOriginally posted by Mike Cash Quote
I'm happy with the output. But the only thing I have to compare it to is the piece of crap Epson I had that was a couple of generations out of date. The main feature I like about it is the "cold" scanning light (don't have to wait for it to warm up before use).
Hey Mike,
I've got the 4400F and pulled down a copy of VueScan the other day. I like it okay (better than the push-n-play Canon software) but not sure which version of it I want to buy. If you are using the Pro version, are you using the TIFF-DNG option when you scan? And do you feel the IT8 and ICC "enhancements" by themselves worth double the money of the standard version?
Thanks!
03-28-2009, 10:59 PM   #12
Forum Member




Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Pleasanton, CA
Posts: 68
Hi, the canon canoscan 8800F scanner finally came. This was my first time to purchase anything from canon in my life, and my first recent scannner not from HP as part of a multifunction box.

I really questioned myself about the specs, etc.

I have to say I have one regret - I should have spent the extra $ 100 and purchased instead the canon pixma printer scanner copier. It is quite well built and even though I don't know anything, I am getting reasonable scans from 35mm negatives and prints.

I had read that people were scanning in reduced resolution to gain speed because "it didn't make any difference". I am not that picky, I can tell you for sure that I can easily see a difference at every step of resolution along the way - and that is not photo shop, just the win vista viewer software.

Now for the real problem - 100meg per negative file size.

I did some initial scans with negs from kodak 100 ultra color - nice.
03-29-2009, 12:45 PM   #13
Veteran Member
OregonJim's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Willamette Valley, Oregon
Posts: 1,329
QuoteOriginally posted by lawsonstone Quote
Processing: do you get traditional negatives and prints, or negatives and digital prints?
I process my own B&W, and occasionally E-6 (Ektachrome). Not set up to do C-41, so I rarely shoot that.

I used to enlarge my own prints, but it's gotten too hard to find good papers, and when I do, the price is exhorbitant and the quantity small. So, I just scan the negs/transparencies.

I have yet to find a printer that does a good job with the tonal range of B&W, though I hear the new Epsons have improved considerably. Will probably start my research all over again in a month or two...
03-29-2009, 08:47 PM   #14
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 1,104
I get my negatives developed and state no prints. Using my 5 year old Epson 2450 Photo flatbed (for now) I max the hardware scan to 48bit, 2400dpi at 100% which equals about a 6MP image. Then tweak in Silkpix and use GiMP for cloning out stray dust, etc. 1 image at that resolution takes 6 minutes!

I have my eye on the Optex scanner for $100, its 3800dpi hardware resolution and much faster. It does slides and negatives only, it's not a flatbed.
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, negatives, post, prints
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Post group pictures! Adam Travel, Events, and Groups 44 12-25-2015 03:15 PM
Can someone post pictures of the red KX Siege973 Pentax DSLR Discussion 8 12-14-2009 05:09 AM
Post your New Years pictures! ftpaddict Post Your Photos! 7 01-01-2009 10:07 AM
Question How do I add pictures to a For Sale Post? Rmpjr7 Site Suggestions and Help 7 10-02-2008 08:40 AM
Labrador Pictures - Post here!! GLThorne Post Your Photos! 22 02-06-2007 02:00 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:46 AM. | See also: NikonForums.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