Converting some slides to digital. What do you think? (Page 2): Infrared slide film. Experimented with it a couple of times. Should have mentioned it.

Overthehill1

David in Dallas wrote:

Good job! Was #3 taken at sunset or has the slide aged and changed colors?

Infrared slide film. Experimented with it a couple of times. Should have mentioned it.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

Look good to me.

Hereford Loc: Palm Coast, FL

I recently scanned about 10,000 35mm slides dating from 1962 to year 2000. I used a dedicated 35mm scanner, the Minolta Dimage Elite which can scan @ 5400 PPI for incredibly beautiful scans that can be printed in very large sizes. I have found the number one problem with old color slides is the color shift deterioration that has taken place. All need to be taken into post processing for color correction to make nice photos again.

Just looking at your posts shows the need for serious color correction.

therwol Loc: USA

Hereford wrote:

I recently scanned about 10,000 35mm slides dating... (show quote)

I've done slides (and negatives from the late 60s onward.) I have used and Epson V800 scanner as well as my Nikon D810 with a 55mm Micro lens over a light box. Number two problem is crud on the slides, and I could never get all of it off, but post processing can clean them up. I have no idea how the crud got there. All of my slides and negatives have been handled carefully.

Overthehill1

Hereford wrote:

I recently scanned about 10,000 35mm slides dating... (show quote)

Thanks for your post but if you could see a couple of prints I had made from the slides originally you wouldn't say that.

ralf Loc: NJ

I had good luck using a D7100 with a Nikon 40mm macro lens - used from B&H and the ES-1. Way Faster than a slide scanner — and very good results.

Retired CPO Loc: Travel full time in an RV

therwol wrote:

I've done slides (and negatives from the late 60s onward.) I have used and Epson V800 scanner as well as my Nikon D810 with a 55mm Micro lens over a light box. Number two problem is crud on the slides, and I could never get all of it off, but post processing can clean them up. I have no idea how the crud got there. All of my slides and negatives have been handled carefully.

There are solutions you can buy intended specifically for cleaning slides/transparencies. I can't remember the name right off hand but it's readily available from photo supply houses.

ronedog

I'm planning on converting thousands of Kodachrome slides as well. Do these scanners put out RAW files? I thought about a 90 or 100 macro with lightsource as well. I'm assuming I should shoot in RAW if doing it myself, correct?

jbhess

Amazing lack of noise!

Sam9987

They look great, so glad that you are being successful. It would be a shame to loose them.

Bubalola Loc: Big Apple, NY

Overthehill1 wrote:

Decided to convert some Kodachrome and Ektachrome slides from the 80s and 90s to digital, using an ES-1 slide adaptor on my D7000 with a manual 3.5mm micro and a 20mm extension tube.

I think they are beautiful, wonder how the originals looked...

therwol Loc: USA

Retired CPO wrote:

There are solutions you can buy intended specifically for cleaning slides/transparencies. I can't remember the name right off hand but it's readily available from photo supply houses.

I've tried everything out there. Those solutions work to a varying degree but not 100%. Wet cleaning risks scratches if you are aggressive, and I decided it wasn't worth it. I just clean things up on the computer.

therwol Loc: USA

ronedog wrote:

I'm planning on converting thousands of Kodachrome slides as well. Do these scanners put out RAW files? I thought about a 90 or 100 macro with lightsource as well. I'm assuming I should shoot in RAW if doing it myself, correct?

You would normally scan as 16 bit .tiff files before editing. Depending on resolution, the files will be huge, something which may or may not be an issue to you. My experience with using a macro lens over a light box has overall been good, but the setup has to be rock solid, no vibration, camera perfectly parallel to the slide etc. Consider a remote release and shooting in the Live View mode with the mirror up. It is much easier with a Nikon and their ES-1 or ES-2 adapter, but I don't think that they will work with anything but a 55 or 60mm macro.

ronedog

Thank you so much.

therwol Loc: USA

ronedog wrote:

Thank you so much.

One thing to add. If your scanner and software allow for scanning as 16 bit tiff files, those are the best for editing, though I'm not sure that all photo editors support it. (PS and Lightroom do.) Tiff files can be edited over and over without degradation. (After editing, you would certainly want to save the edited files as jpegs for sharing but without deleting the original tiff files in case you want to work with them in the future.

One other thing to add. If you photograph slides, then it would be best to photograph in RAW and do the usual with the files when you edit them.