| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 121200 | 2011-10-15 22:44:00 | Film/Negative Scanning | maccrazy (6741) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 1237805 | 2011-10-17 08:29:00 | Good thought Nomad, I will suggest that. I think he's looking at buying the V700, there are about 1000 plates to scan. Still I like your idea of photographing the (neg) photo. | Winston001 (3612) | ||
| 1237806 | 2011-10-18 03:48:00 | reasonable quality and speed can be achieved by projecting the slides and the re photographing with a digital camera on a tripod, a friend did this and I was surprised at how good the results were +1 |
BBCmicro (15761) | ||
| 1237807 | 2011-10-18 07:42:00 | reasonable quality and speed can be achieved by projecting the slides and the re photographing with a digital camera on a tripod, a friend did this and I was surprised at how good the results were It can work quite well, but you do need a proper screen to get the contrast right, and the screen has to be flat, with the camera in the same plane as the projector and directly over the projector lense or you get awful parallex errors. Scanners are best, and there is a fair amount of info on the web for copying larger neg. photos on a scanner. In fact I copied a 55 year old 2cm-thick etched metal/wood printer's block recently using nothing more than a shiny foil cover to concentrate the light, then reversed the image to get a positive and ended up with a pretty reasonable mono image. One person in the photo was my Father and his face was turned away slightly but he was still recognisable. I didn't know that he was in it until I produced a positive. Cheers Billy 8-{) |
Billy T (70) | ||
| 1237808 | 2011-10-18 08:42:00 | One person in the photo was my Father and his face was turned away slightly but he was still recognisable. I didn't know that he was in it until I produced a positive. Cheers Billy 8-{)you want to try handsetting type for a bit of fun. |
plod (107) | ||
| 1237809 | 2011-10-18 09:28:00 | It can work quite well, but you do need a proper screen to get the contrast right, and the screen has to be flat, with the camera in the same plane as the projector and directly over the projector lense or you get awful parallex errors . Scanners are best . . . Yes that's what my friend says too . His father was a photographer, not a snap shot taker . As you point out, apparently there are potential problems such as parallax, indistinct contrast, lens imperfections, yadda yadda . . . . so a high end scanner really is the best and most efficient solution . |
Winston001 (3612) | ||
| 1237810 | 2011-10-23 19:40:00 | Thanks for your suggestions guys. I think I might just give one of those companies a shot and see how a film converted by them compares with a film converted by me. So glad we live in digital times now. :p | maccrazy (6741) | ||
| 1237811 | 2011-11-02 23:33:00 | I am a dirty dirty spammer | mjm132 (16587) | ||
| 1237812 | 2011-11-02 23:42:00 | you want to try handsetting type for a bit of fun. that's what my father used to do for a living |
gary67 (56) | ||
| 1 2 | |||||