| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 83120 | 2007-09-20 01:54:00 | Scanning 35mm Slides | B.M. (505) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 593175 | 2008-01-26 10:08:00 | Cool, thanks for the heads up tutaenui (great handle by the way, LMAOROTF), and may one of those handy "round-to-it"s land in your court soon Grimy :) Digikiwi |
digikiwi (10681) | ||
| 593176 | 2008-01-26 22:46:00 | If you are into mucking around and adapting a bit of gear you can make an adapter for your camera and then just re photograph them. I made an adapter using an old koken filter holder. The results were quite reasonable or at least ok. Have a look here: i50.photobucket.com You've got me interested in that Joe. :thumbs: Those photos are good enough for me. Would you have time to explain in a little more detail? :) |
B.M. (505) | ||
| 593177 | 2008-01-27 20:51:00 | Have a look at this link and build your own attachment to scan slides www.google.co.nz when you open the search page.choose the backlighter link. |
peter pan (6885) | ||
| 593178 | 2008-01-27 21:52:00 | Have a look at this link and build your own attachment to scan slides www.google.co.nz when you open the search page.choose the backlighter link. Thanks Peter, yes I've tried that see (post 10 in this thread) but the results were poor. I even tried it with a different scanner but no luck there either. I'm still looking for an old slide projector so I can just photograph the screen with my digicam but haven't been able to find one at a reasonable cost. One will turn up sooner or later. |
B.M. (505) | ||
| 593179 | 2008-01-27 22:19:00 | Thanks Peter, yes I've tried that see (post 10 in this thread) but the results were poor. I even tried it with a different scanner but no luck there either. I'm still looking for an old slide projector so I can just photograph the screen with my digicam but haven't been able to find one at a reasonable cost. One will turn up sooner or later. I would have thought that with the low cost of scanners these days it really isn't worth the bother of trying to bodge something up that might work. My old (now retired) HP with slide and negative attachment worked really well on slides. Not good on negative. My first HP scanner had one of those odd little mirror devices that was reasonable on slides. Of course the snag is that once you have done all your slides then the particular equipment becomes redundant. So if there are not many slides then probably Hanafins service is the answer. |
Thomas01 (317) | ||
| 593180 | 2008-01-27 23:23:00 | Would you have time to explain in a little more detail? :) For a start you will need a camera with a filter tread and a good closeup or macro. Get a koken filter holder (available from most photograph retailers) and then build a slide holder for the slide. The holder in the photo was simple just using rubber bands to hold the slide in place but I later made one so the slide simply dropped in. You will need to experiment with backgound and lighting. I put the camera on a tri-pod and found the sky on a bright but hazy day worked fine but a light box would be easy to build and more practical for consistent results. It was a fast way of copying slides it worked well enough, with images just needing a bit of cropping and cleaning up with photoshop. |
Joe Blogs (35) | ||
| 593181 | 2008-01-28 02:02:00 | I've had a quick play today with my Plustek 7200. I scanned a box of 36 slides using the Silverfast software. Making the files 5mb Tiff, at 600dpi and 200% of original slide size and only using the automatic image correction option it took just on an hour. Most of these slides (20 years old) are in poor condition. The first few had a lot of specks/spots/etc on them and I started trying to do the whole colour/spot correction thing, but realised it was going to take too long (I have thousands of slides to do), so went the small file/auto route. The Silverfast software has plenty of screens and adjustments, but I've not used any other proper photo correction software to be able to make a comparison. My slides are Kodachrome 64, which I've read can be tricky to scan. I decided that at least this way, I'll get them onto the computer, and if there are any I really want, then I can spend the time messing around later. Most I'll probably never look at again, but at least the job is now started. Certainly easier and quicker than my old HP scanjet 3570c with it's transperancy adapter. |
Grimy (3041) | ||
| 593182 | 2008-01-28 05:40:00 | To add to my post above. I think you have to consider 5Mb Tiff files as thumbnails/email files. Although a lot of what I scanned seems fine, when I came to some mountain photos I needed to go to 50Mb and more ideally, 80Mb to get the detail in the rock. On the lower resolution I ended up with some weird crystal formations instead of rock and gravel. An 80 mb scan is still only a few miutes with auto adjustments, but 4 boxes of 36 has now taken about 6 hours, and only the last one was with the big file sizes. Time for some BIIIIIIG external hard drives! |
Grimy (3041) | ||
| 593183 | 2008-01-28 08:15:00 | To add to my post above. I think you have to consider 5Mb Tiff files as thumbnails/email files. Although a lot of what I scanned seems fine, when I came to some mountain photos I needed to go to 50Mb and more ideally, 80Mb to get the detail in the rock. On the lower resolution I ended up with some weird crystal formations instead of rock and gravel. An 80 mb scan is still only a few miutes with auto adjustments, but 4 boxes of 36 has now taken about 6 hours, and only the last one was with the big file sizes. Time for some BIIIIIIG external hard drives! Very interesting Grimy. :thumbs: Keep us up to date.:thumbs: |
B.M. (505) | ||
| 593184 | 2008-01-28 09:43:00 | I still use film .. I like it not saying its better. Mostly .. that no LCD .. you enjoy the environment more and shoot less as film is not free. No need to recharge batteries that much .. and you have a hard copy .. How I use it: I have a Epson scanner, with the Epson scanner I auto scan the film and it auto scans all the frames for you and saves a JPG or TIF for each frame in a folder. You can specify the size up to 8,000 dpi if you want but filesize may reach 100MB per picture. I scan mine into 1024x768 so its small for previewing and if I need it more I may scan higher when I need it. Cos its takes long time and big HDD space. If I scan 4000 dpi I get a file around 50-75MB per frame. For a roll of film that is 2GB. For 10 rolls that is 20GB. For the scans try out diff software with your scanner and determine which is best. For my one I like Epson software over Silverfast which was provided for free. Some films may also not scan that well with your combination. If you do a search they may say that flatbed scanners cannot compete with serious scanners and if you took the discontinued Minolta and current Nikons they can be a huge improvement over Plusek and etc scanners but they do cost a fair amount. They say medium format film may enlarge to A4 only in a really good quality and they say 35mm film may be good to 5x7 only or 6x4. I have used 35mm and printed 8x10 and I am happy although its not as sharp as my 6MP digital SLR and probably not as good as a good Nikon scanner. |
Nomad (952) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 5 | |||||