Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Scanning 35mm (slides)
Page <prev 2 of 3 next>
May 20, 2023 10:51:31   #
bsprague Loc: Lacey, WA, USA
 
Mentioned in the topic are the Canon CanoScan 9000, Epson 550 and Epson 700. Those are no longer in production. Currently available are the Epson 600 and the faster, more expensive Epson 850.

Reply
May 20, 2023 11:03:35   #
donspears Loc: Joshua, TX
 
JBuckley wrote:
Can the newer Canon scanners copy and download 35 mm color slides to digital?
Or, is it best to turn them into a photo lab.
I have nearly a 1,000 to digitize before they start to decay.
Any help or advice will be appreciated.



Canoscan 9000 MKII Canon equivalent to Epson V600.

Reply
May 20, 2023 14:00:15   #
Dessie Loc: Northern Ireland
 
MrMophoto wrote:
When I decided to digitize all my old film images I did some research and purchased an Epson V600, IMHO a great scanner. I scanned all my 35mm B&W negs with no problem at all. I scanned a lot of slides with very little problems, it has a back light feature that works great. The only issue I had was scanning my 2 1/4" square negs ( for a while I used a Mamyaflex), I had to scan these one at a time.

Reply
 
 
May 20, 2023 14:42:57   #
MrBob Loc: lookout Mtn. NE Alabama
 
Really not much help to you but I still have an unused Minolta Dimage scan elite with Silverfast software still in box... No, I cannot sell but maybe you have given me inspiration to do something with it. Good luck...

Reply
May 20, 2023 15:48:39   #
TimmyKnowles Loc: Gallup, New Mexico
 
You might be disappointed with the quality of flatbed scans. I've done some on an Epson and they don't compare at all with what I've done on a Nikon 5000 or Minolta 5400. Those dedicated scanners are 10 years out of production, but are often seen on e-bay and a company or two will still service the Nikon, which can be used with a batch scanner. Companies like ScanCafe will scan each slide on a disc or hard drive to send them to you, but they're only 10mb, far less than you could do with a Nikon scanner. Ask yourself if you want to scan hundreds of image at maybe a low quality and if you print them, will you be happy? Get it right the first time so you don't have to re-scan. I scanned my parents' wedding slides from 1955 about 15 years ago. They were on Anscochrome and starting to turn magenta and now many are unrecognizable. Fortunately, I scanned them on a 5400 Minolta, corrected them and they are fine. BTW, I taught Photoshop and later Lightroom at the university level so I know a little bit about scanning.

Reply
May 20, 2023 16:29:13   #
Tote1940 Loc: Dallas
 
If you go the scanner route check out Vuescan, save as best scans as TIFFS so you can readjust in Photoshop or Lightroom best.
Some Hoggers have posted magnificent camera scans however.

Reply
May 20, 2023 16:34:26   #
TimmyKnowles Loc: Gallup, New Mexico
 
Vuescan is really the only way to go. I've used it on Nikon & Minolta scanners as well as Epson.

Reply
 
 
May 20, 2023 16:35:01   #
druid_city_dude Loc: Tuscaloosa, AL
 
Teach us how to do it correctly. I have an Epson V600 and a Nikon 5000ED and Vuescan.

Reply
May 20, 2023 16:45:19   #
jcboy3
 
JBuckley wrote:
Can the newer Canon scanners copy and download 35 mm color slides to digital?
Or, is it best to turn them into a photo lab.
I have nearly a 1,000 to digitize before they start to decay.
Any help or advice will be appreciated.


Slides are very straightforward to digitize. And much faster than a scanner. There are a number of solutions with details on the web. Basically, you use a macro lens (around 60mm works best), a slide holder (Nikon is good), a good CRI light (speedlights are good, but a continuous light will allow focus), some extension tubes that go between the lens and slide holder. You also need a good blower and dust brush, and I recommend a digital LED light box for slide viewing. You can do thousands in a very short time. And then sell off the gear you bought and be done with it.

Reply
May 20, 2023 16:57:45   #
User ID
 
DaveyDitzer wrote:
It might seem complicated but I use a slide holder with a macro lens and an LED light source to provide a constant light temperature. I shoot RAW and jpeg and then PP the RAW if corrections are needed.

Yup. Thaz the ultimate. Perfect if you are converting "masterpieces" from chromes to digital. OTOH, those facing shoe boxes of ancient family vacation snaps all seem happy enuf with their Epson scanners.

If I had to do a digital "family slide show" I would still use a camera rather than a scanner. Not fussing over "masterpiece" quality, a camera is blazingly fast if you know how to use one. In the Pleistocene when I did film-to-film, a hurried job ran about 10 slides per minute. Today would go about 25% faster without the delays from constantly reloading film.

Reply
May 20, 2023 18:05:49   #
Tote1940 Loc: Dallas
 
In Pleistocene era doing film to film duplication with conventional film contrast build up was main problem
Never tried special slide duplicating film
Love Digital era !

Reply
 
 
May 20, 2023 18:08:37   #
User ID
 
Tote1940 wrote:
In Pleistocene era doing film to film duplication with conventional film contrast build up was main problem
Never tried special slide duplicating film
Love Digital era !

Always used duping film. The right stuff.
Agreed about digital. Also the right stuff.

Reply
May 20, 2023 23:02:08   #
djamkaarat
 
I bought a Nikon Coolscan IV in 2000, and been using it ever since. It was a premium price at the time, but can be found for a fraction of the price today on eBay. Last year, I found a Pacific Image film/slide scanner locally for $20.00 and it worked just fine, hardly a difference between it and the Nikon. I have an Epson 750 that I use for 4x5 negs and transparencies, and a Nikon 8000 for medium format. I have compared the results from the Epson against the Nikon and at first glance, they seem comparable, but on closer scrutiny, there's no comparison. I guess what I'm saying is, if you just want a quick digitization of your slides, go with the Epson, It will batch a dozen at a time if memory serves. I also highly recommend Hamrick VueScan software, it's as good as, if not better than, SilverFast, way cheaper, and can be used for all your scanners, and shared with one other user, too.
Best of luck

Reply
May 21, 2023 08:50:17   #
gvarner Loc: Central Oregon Coast
 
bsprague wrote:
If you want to use a scanner, look at the Epson V600 or V850. The come with slide and negative holders.

Search here and you should find lots of discussions about slide scanning. Many prefer to find methods and devices that allow you to take picture of your slides with you camera.

One choice is the Nikon slide holder that attaches to macro lenses with adapter rings.


I agree and I would add that if you could afford it, the V850 would have a faster scan rate at the higher resolutions.

Reply
May 21, 2023 10:27:42   #
burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC
 
Tote1940 wrote:
In Pleistocene era doing film to film duplication with conventional film contrast build up was main problem
Never tried special slide duplicating film
Love Digital era !


Back in the 1970s and 1980s, Kodak made two low contrast Ektachrome emulsions specifically for slide duplication. 5071 Ektachrome Duplicating Film was for tungsten-halogen light exposures of about one second. SO-366 (special order) was for electronic flash exposures of 1/300 and shorter. I used 5071 with an enlarger color head source, and SO-366 with a Bowens Illumitran IIIc.

Those were essentially the same film, with different reciprocity characteristics. They worked fine with Ektachrome originals, but weirdly with Kodachrome. You still got some contrast build-up, but nothing like using standard slide film for copies.

Many folks, including famous photographer, Pete Turner, (https://www.peteturner.com) used Kodachrome 25 as copy film in a Bowens Illumitran IIIc, in part because the IIIc had a "contrast reduction" system. It "flashed" the film with a second, very dim white light exposure at the same time as the main copy exposure. This lowered the dMax, and supposedly sensitized the film just enough to reveal more shadow detail. Whether it worked or not, I never could decide. I didn't use it very often. Frankly, looking at Pete's work, I don't think he did, either! Building contrast with the copy process was part of his technique.

For those who want to try "camera scanning" — copying slides and negatives with a digital camera and macro lens — I wrote this white paper:

Camera Scanning.pdf opens in your favorite PDF reader.
Attached file:
(Download)

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 3 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.