Check out Printers and Color Printing Forum section of our forum.
Kodachrome and Velvia slides to best quality digital...how
Jun 26, 2014 07:30:30 #
Safarimike
Loc: Florida
What is the best way to convert several hundred slides to high quality digital files that can be printed at 16x20 and larger. I've led photo safaris throughout Africa for many years and have thousands of slide images (I'm only interested in the best being digitized). I'm not a real pp guy and just decided to use Lightroom instead of (please don't laugh) Picasa. I've been programmed to believe the only way to get quality files was with expensive Nikon Coolscan or drum scanners. Please advise...my next safari is September, but I'll now be shooting with D7000 and probably shoot RAW plus JPEG since it takes 2 SD cards. I know my way around Africa but I'm in need of great help with post processing. Here's hoping I can use Lightroom and become a RAW shooter.
Jun 26, 2014 07:55:04 #
Plustek scanners are less expensive but can get you good results. In any case it is a slow process if you do it yourself. Expensive if you someone else.
Jun 26, 2014 08:25:56 #
I recently purchased an Epson V600 film scanner to digitize some old 35mm slides, as well as 6x6mm color negatives and slides. I must say it does a wonderful job as far as resolution is concerned if I scan at 2400 DPI. 200% enlargement with no visible grain. The bad news is, it takes 2-3 minutes per picture (6x6) to scan, plus the PhotoShop time to fine tune the colors and re-size. If I had several hundred slides to scan, I'd probably opt for one of the commercial services. An additional advantage to the Epson is I now have a copy machine on my desk.
Check out The Dynamics of Photographic Lighting section of our forum.
Jun 27, 2014 06:24:00 #
SonyA580 wrote:
I recently purchased an Epson V600 film scanner to... (show quote)
I have used Scan Cafe and have been pleased with them have recently had about 500 slides and 700 or so negatives done, takes about 6 weeks.
Jun 27, 2014 07:31:12 #
Safarimike wrote:
What is the best way to convert several hundred sl... (show quote)
I just got a bunch done by ScanCafe, and they did an excellent job. I paid $0.29 per slide, plus UPS shipping both ways (their rule). For larger numbers of slides, the rate drops.
After they do the scans, they let you view them and eliminate up to 15% that you don't want. Then, for $0.02 per slide, you can download them while you wait for the original slides and the CD/DVD to arrive via UPS.
These prices are for 35mm. For 126 or 127, the price is $0.99, since it takes much longer to do them, for some reason.
http://www.scancafe.com/services/valuekit-product/?cid=GOOG&template=1&gclid=CjkKEQjwrLSdBRDYvIL0soO4vo0BEiQABALkqcpqxGykAJJvp2RmaThF7Syf4IroBV3Ca-SqA1-JBDbw_wcB
Original slide
Scanned and improved
Jun 27, 2014 08:57:12 #
jerryc41 wrote:
I just got a bunch done by ScanCafe, and they did ... (show quote)
Wow....impressive."a few years ago I used Dig My Pics....they did a great job in every way but then burned down..... yikes(!)
I am glad to know of ScanCafe.....still have thousands of slides.....sigh....not in the budget right now....
Jun 27, 2014 09:50:32 #
twiga wrote:
Wow....impressive."a few years ago I used Dig My Pics....they did a great job in every way but then burned down..... yikes(!)
I am glad to know of ScanCafe.....still have thousands of slides.....sigh....not in the budget right now....
I am glad to know of ScanCafe.....still have thousands of slides.....sigh....not in the budget right now....
Do a few at a time - maybe get over their limit to get a price reduction. Then go back and do more.
Check out Street Photography section of our forum.
Jun 27, 2014 11:00:17 #
jerryc41 wrote:
Do a few at a time - maybe get over their limit to get a price reduction. Then go back and do more.
good advice Jerry.....I will check 'em out......thanks! :)
Jun 27, 2014 11:24:49 #
jerryc41 wrote:
I just got a bunch done by ScanCafe, and they did ... (show quote)
Are scans that cheap really good enough to print 16x20?
Jun 27, 2014 11:46:58 #
Go to the Ken Rockwell site - he recommends a place in CA - that does his scanning - impressive work !
Jun 27, 2014 12:05:42 #
MW wrote:
Plustek scanners are less expensive but can get you good results. In any case it is a slow process if you do it yourself. Expensive if you someone else.
:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: Yes Plustek are the best now (well, if you don't count drum scanners), they put the Nikon models to shame, but you have to run them with a good software. And the best there is SilverFast!
Check out Landscape Photography section of our forum.
Jun 27, 2014 12:12:45 #
jerryc41 wrote:
These prices are for 35mm. For 126 or 127, the price is $0.99, since it takes much longer to do them, for some reason.
Nice TC
Seems I heard that the ScanCafe slides go to India for scanning. Explained in this link.
http://www.lifeindigitalfilm.com/2009/09/review-scancafe-film-scanning-service.html
Somehow, I seem to see rows of little East Indian urchins, hunched over long planks on the ground with hand scanners.
:mrgreen:
Jun 27, 2014 12:33:20 #
Kuzano wrote:
Nice TC
Seems I heard that the ScanCafe slides go to India for scanning. Explained in this link.
http://www.lifeindigitalfilm.com/2009/09/review-scancafe-film-scanning-service.html
Somehow, I seem to see rows of little East Indian urchins, hunched over long planks on the ground with hand scanners.
:mrgreen:
Seems I heard that the ScanCafe slides go to India for scanning. Explained in this link.
http://www.lifeindigitalfilm.com/2009/09/review-scancafe-film-scanning-service.html
Somehow, I seem to see rows of little East Indian urchins, hunched over long planks on the ground with hand scanners.
:mrgreen:
I think that is true and there is a way, more expensive though, to get them back sooner and keep them in the country but who cares as long as they do good work.
Jun 27, 2014 12:39:44 #
wj cody
Loc: springfield illinois
why do you feel the need to convert these, at all?
a 16x20 enlargement directly from the transparencies will certainly top anything printed digitally.
as an example a 16x20 enlargement from a 35mm transparency will contain 354 dots per inch; while the same digital print will contain 249 dots per inch.
the film print will register as much higher quality, in addition to having depth, which digital printing cannot come close to.
so, why settle for second best?
a 16x20 enlargement directly from the transparencies will certainly top anything printed digitally.
as an example a 16x20 enlargement from a 35mm transparency will contain 354 dots per inch; while the same digital print will contain 249 dots per inch.
the film print will register as much higher quality, in addition to having depth, which digital printing cannot come close to.
so, why settle for second best?
Jun 27, 2014 12:53:49 #
wj cody wrote:
why do you feel the need to convert these, at all?
a 16x20 enlargement directly from the transparencies will certainly top anything printed digitally.
as an example a 16x20 enlargement from a 35mm transparency will contain 354 dots per inch; while the same digital print will contain 249 dots per inch.
the film print will register as much higher quality, in addition to having depth, which digital printing cannot come close to.
so, why settle for second best?
a 16x20 enlargement directly from the transparencies will certainly top anything printed digitally.
as an example a 16x20 enlargement from a 35mm transparency will contain 354 dots per inch; while the same digital print will contain 249 dots per inch.
the film print will register as much higher quality, in addition to having depth, which digital printing cannot come close to.
so, why settle for second best?
Dots per inch is a printing term, that has nothing to do if the image is digital or not, so that statement is false.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.