Scanning 35mm negatives?? FRUSTRATION - Page 3
PhotoCamel: Your friendly photo community, with free discussion forums, digital photography reviews, photo sharing, galleries, downloads, blogs, photography contests, and prizes.
 

Go Back   PhotoCamel - Your Friendly Photography Forum > Cameras and Lenses > Film Camera

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-02-2015   #21
Vicuna
 
Location: Australia
Posts: 168
CamelKarma: 32599
Editing OK?: Yes
Constructive Critique?: Yes
Default Re: Scanning 35mm negatives?? FRUSTRATION

It often comes down to money but I think your V550 is capable of reasonable results similar to my V600.
Here is a Kodachrome slide I scanned with my V600. Slides can have different issues to negatives (eg. a blue color cast) but some post processing is the trick. Today the tools are so readily available unlike when this photo was actually taken.
It was taken by me in ~1979 in the Norfolk Broads, UK. The old boat just hit me as something worthy of a photograph. I just post it as another example.
Oldboat-Norfolk-red.jpg
Keep scanning and processing precious photos.
mshoot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2015   #22
PhotoCamel Supporter DONATED
Dromedary
 
BovrilArg's Avatar
 
Location: Jakarta Indonesia (Originally Texas)
Posts: 1,105
CamelKarma: 1606297
Editing OK?: Yes
Constructive Critique?: Yes
Default Re: Scanning 35mm negatives?? FRUSTRATION

Film is a bit expensive to get into but so is digital. With digital I had to get software such as Lightroom and Photoshop to work with the images. Once this investment is made you are good for a couple of years and then you need to upgrade the software. A few years after that you will need to upgrade the computer...All very expensive but we are used to paying it so we do not notice it.

With film if you went the route of a dark room you would be looking at a similar investment to a computer and the software however it would be good for your lifetime without any options to upgrade. It will work the same from day one to the last day you use it....and no virus attacks!

Then you are left with the cost of film, chemicals, photo paper. None of that is cheap but I find that I do not use too much of it. You do not need to create a print of every image you make so the investment is not too bad.

The problem I have with photography is the desire to get the next piece of gear. I do not need it and it does not help my become a better photographer but I just like to have it.

Today I just got a new (to me) Leica M6. My wife thinks I am insane and she is probably right. But it sure beats spending money at a bar or on cigerettes or some other such vice. Photography can be as expensive or as cheap as you want it to be.
__________________
---------------------------
BovrilArg
AKA Patrick

www.filmstillphotography.com

My family and I travel all over the world so photography was a logical way to capture the wonder of the places we go.
The lifestyle requires sacrifices such as not having friends or family near us. This is why Photocamel is so wonderful.
It lets me keep friendly photographers with me everywhere I go!
BovrilArg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2015   #23
Vicuna
 
Location: xxx
Posts: 236
CamelKarma: 596039
Editing OK?: No
Constructive Critique?: Yes
Default Re: Scanning 35mm negatives?? FRUSTRATION

Scanning isnt the only way to convert/digitize your film negatives negatives although it is what everyone think is the most common and most effective way of converting all your old photos to digital..
i though that with the advent of better and higher mp sensor, it would be fairly better to just shoot the negative in a lightbox with a macro lens a better option? (advantage being you can work on a raw file)
__________________
post whatever is in your mind no matter how unbearable it is to others, no matter if they are in authority, or a forum bully or simply a sour troll. In the end you can't please everyone and may annoy some but that is what a forum should be, an open discussion complete with trolls all over.
moodless is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2016   #24
Guanaco
 
Posts: 382
CamelKarma: 223163
Editing OK?: Ask First
Constructive Critique?: Yes
Default Re: Scanning 35mm negatives?? FRUSTRATION

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lens Pirate View Post
I first started shooting in 1979. Had a sweet little Fujica 35mm

Fast forward to now and I have been shooting great digital gear for a long long time. I have grown to enjoy the latitude of Camera Raw files.

I just picked up a new to me Pentax LX and shot a roll of film. I took it to a local shop for developing and to make a DVD of the images.

The Gave me 500k sized 72 DPI images. WTF? Useless. no latitude in post processing at all. Is that seriously the best commercial scanners can do?

What sort of images size/resolution is reasonable to expect?

Thanks
They are not 72 dpi. That is what your monitor defaults to. But the low resolution is your issue here. My lab gives me 2000x3000 or 2400x3600 resolution scans, and the prints look really nice. Just get the highest resolution scans that you can.
__________________
"A photograph that mirrors reality, cannot compare to one that reflects the spirit"

Kiron Kid
Kiron Kid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2016   #25
Vicuna
 
Location: Australia
Posts: 168
CamelKarma: 32599
Editing OK?: Yes
Constructive Critique?: Yes
Default Re: Scanning 35mm negatives?? FRUSTRATION

"Shops" will give you low resolution scans. If you have a medium priced scanner (egV600) then you can get the results I have produced.
mshoot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2016   #26
PhotoCamel Supporter DONATED
Bactrian
 
Jim Jones's Avatar
 
Location: Rural Missouri
Posts: 2,338
CamelKarma: 501383
Editing OK?: Yes
Constructive Critique?: Yes
Default Re: Scanning 35mm negatives?? FRUSTRATION

A flatbed scanner may produce images from 35mm film that are good enough for posting online or making small prints. It depends on the subject matter, the size of the final image, and the judgement of the viewer. I'm rarely satisfied with the results except for quick online posting. Don't trust the ads for some modest film scanners. Even though they can honestly cite reviews from contented users, those users may be less critical than we are.
Jim Jones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2016   #27
Vicuna
 
Location: Australia
Posts: 168
CamelKarma: 32599
Editing OK?: Yes
Constructive Critique?: Yes
Default Re: Scanning 35mm negatives?? FRUSTRATION

Look at my post #17.
I can get a high quality 15x10" print from 35mm film using my flatbed V600. See the full res crop of the Vespa. My scan of the old boat kodachrome slide is even better. You need to do post processing as I indicated.
I can upload a full hi res version if the moderators allow.

No I can't upload a hi res version of the "old boat" but the hi res scan would easily make a high quality 15x10" print.
Here is a full res crop
img014ed3-adjust-4-crop2.jpg
You can see the spider webs on the right of the tiller. The camera was a Pentax SLR and the photo was taken ~1978.


__________________
Members don't see ads in threads. Register for your free account today and become a member of PhotoCamel to open up the site's many benefits and features.

Last edited by mshoot; 06-25-2016 at 09:22 PM.. Reason: Add
mshoot is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

« PhotoCamel - Your Friendly Photography Forum > Cameras and Lenses > Film Camera »


Share this topic:

Thread Tools
Display Modes