Re: Getting photos and slides into digital format
- From: "Mortimer" <me@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 22:01:07 +0100
"John of Aix" <j.murphy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:48123fc3$0$859$ba4acef3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Mike Scott wrote:
Jim wrote:
...
There are specialised scanners that are designed to scan direct
from slides and nagatives. They are around the £300-400 mark but
depending on how many you have to do, it may be worth a look.
Even at £300, the latter would certainly be a cheaper option
than Boots etc, particularly if there are many to be done.
Having been down that route myself, I found the slide scanner (canon
fs2710) was very slow and highly labour intensive. Took around a half
hour plus for each 36-exp film (clean slide, load slide, preview,
scan, remove slide, correct mistake made because job is so boringly
mindless.....). Pick something more efficient, or let the pro's do it!
I'm following this thread with interest as I know someone who had loads of
slides to scan and so bought a scanner specially for the job, a Canon
something I think. I can't recall exactly how many he had to do, about six
hundred I think, six at a time. He didn't do any correction, just a
straight scan and storing. Luckily he was retired and while he spent
several hours a day on his PC, he'd just do the scans for as long as it
didn't become too "boringly mindless" as you say, and thus often with
mistakes after a bit ad rising inattention: B/W; overwritten previous
files etc, that he just did a half hour or so every day or two. I think it
took him close on a year to do them all, without loading Photoshop
subsequently to sort them out. Certainly, after seeing this, I definitely
think that if I had the money I'd use a pro, they have machines for that
sort of stuff, I'm not a machine.
I bought a slide scanner to scan all my old slides and negatives. It's a
Minolta, but I forget the exact model. I found it very difficult to get
decent results, either using the Minolta software or Vuescan: especially for
negatives, the defaults are a long way off being any good, so you have to
manually adjust each frame separately (it's not always the same adjustment).
Slides ended up very contrasty (especially Kodachrome) with blown highlights
and muddy shadows and negatives were muddy, had random colour casts and had
a lot of noise (like very large grain) in the sky. With a lot of tweaking
and patience, the results could be superb, especially with Ektachrome or
Agfachrome slides or with Ilford XP1 black and white negatives (XP1 is the
B&W film which uses dyes like colour film), but it was a long slow job. For
colour negatives, it was possible to reveal shadow and highlight detail that
was lost in prints made commercially.
Just don't expect it to work straight out of the box, without a lot of
individual tweaking for each frame. :-(
For making thumbnail pictures for indexing, I put four slides on my flat-bed
scanner and got through them much more quickly.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Getting photos and slides into digital format
- From: Mike Scott
- Re: Getting photos and slides into digital format
- References:
- Getting photos and slides into digital format
- From: Andrew Sayers
- Re: Getting photos and slides into digital format
- From: M.I.5¾
- Re: Getting photos and slides into digital format
- From: Mike Scott
- Re: Getting photos and slides into digital format
- From: John of Aix
- Getting photos and slides into digital format
- Prev by Date: Re: Getting photos and slides into digital format
- Next by Date: Re: Getting photos and slides into digital format
- Previous by thread: Re: Getting photos and slides into digital format
- Next by thread: Re: Getting photos and slides into digital format
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
