How many of you use, or are interested in using, high-end film scanners for:
a) scanning your old film?
b) scanning future film?
I have thousands of 35mm and 120 negs and slides but I am thinking that perhaps I might either get bored with scanning or think "why should I keep using my 35mm and 120 film cameras when I have been happy to use my D300s and D200"?
(I could say more in that I have a full complement of B&W and colour darkroom equipment sleeping in my loft)
In summary what is to be gained by investing in a high end scanner like the forthcoming 35/120 Plustek for use with film cameras?
If only Mozart had had a camera
#1. "RE: Do you scan old or new?" | In response to Reply # 0esantos Nikonian since 10th Nov 2002Sun 26-Feb-12 04:33 PM
When I was shooting film, before I went totally digital with the D100, I owned a Nikon Super CoolScan 4000. Soon after I stopped shooting film altogether I sold it and bought a good quality flatbed scanner (Epson 4990). I didn't miss the Nikon at all until last year when my mother passed away and I found a cache of old slides from the fifties and sixties taken by my father when they were a young couple. I sure wished that I had not sold the scanner then. I have been scanning these old slides (which include trips they would take to Mexico) over this past year and the Epson, while doing a very good job, is not in the same league as the Nikon. Although some of these slides are badly scratched, dirty, and some have water damage it is obvious that the Epson just cannot resolve the finer details like I know the Nikon could. Happily, the quality of the Epson scans is such that I've been able to make some beautiful 8x10 prints that now hang in our home. It just takes a lot more time and work to clean by hand and edit the images to bring out as much detail as possible.
esartprints.com Ernesto Santos Photography
Get my new e-Book "Churches of Texas"
#7. "RE: Do you scan old or new?" | In response to Reply # 1robsb Nikonian since 23rd Aug 2006Tue 28-Feb-12 12:00 AM
I am scanning some old slides in my collection with an Epson Perfection V700 and Silver Fast Archive Suite and I think they are coming out very well. I am scanning at 6400 dpi as after running some resolution tests which I posted in the scanner forum, that gave me the best resolution. I scan to a Silver Fast HDRi format which is 3 16 bit color channels and 1 16 bit IR channel to do dust and scratch removal. The resultant TIFFS are quiter large the long side a bit over 8100 pixels. This is then converted using Silver Fast HDR SW to a 48 bit color image which I further process in Captue NX2.3.1 64 bit.
My Nikonians Gallery
"Nikonians membership - My most important photographic investment, after the
Retirement is a gift of time - Don't waste it!
Old age is a special gift that very few receive. Be thankful if you get it.
#2. "RE: Do you scan old or new?" | In response to Reply # 0
I still shoot some film. I bought a Nikon F6 over a year ago. I sold my Nikon Coolscan 4000 and bought a Nikon Coolscan 9000. So I am still shooting and scanning some film. However, I shoot less film than digital now.
Whether there is anything to be "gained" by shooting and scanning film can only be decided by the individual. Personlly I still like the look of Velvia (and some other film) and I plan to continue shooting film for the foreseeable future.
#4. "RE: Do you scan old or new?" | In response to Reply # 2Beemer2 Nikonian since 07th Dec 2006Sun 26-Feb-12 07:17 PM
I have Canon T90 and Mamiyaflex 330f systems with many lenses. I am loath to sell either of them. The T90 feels better in my hands than my D300s and the 330f was wonderful to use.
I'm guessing that scanned 120 B&W medium speed would result in higher quality images than the D300s but I could be wrong.
If only Mozart had had a camera
#5. "RE: Do you scan old or new?" | In response to Reply # 4Mon 27-Feb-12 11:39 PM
Ian, I do not have experience scanning medium format film so am unable to provide any insight into how the quality compares to that of the D300. My guess is that you can indeed obtain some excellent quality by scanning 120 film. I have been pleasantly surprised how much quality can be produced from some pretty bad 35mm photos I have taken. That is not to say that there are not noise an quality limitations...if one starts with a bad image, one cannot turn it into a masterpiece. But overall I am well pleased with the results of scanning 35mm film. Nonetheless, I think that it is pretty well established that the quality of images produced by the current models of 35mm equivalent digital cameras is, for the most part, superior to images produced by 35mm film cameras. However, that analysis does not take into account the "look" and "feel" of the two technologies.
I continue to shoot some film and scan for two reasons:
1. I have a LOT of film negatives, most of which I have already scanned but from time to time wish to rescan with my newer scanner (or rescan to try to obtain a better result);
2. I just like the look and feel of some of the film images. That is not to say that they are better, only that they are different.
I could add a third reason: I really like my F6.
#3. "RE: Do you scan old or new?" | In response to Reply # 0
I have no interest in taking film (negs or slides) at this point, but I have 1000's of my own slides, lots of 1000's of B&W negatives and close to 1000 of my Dad's slides (original Kodachrome 10).
I would love to have them all scanned -- why? not for me, I have looked at them all many times over -- but as slides and negatives, my children and grandchildren (and great and great-great ...) will never see them -- and I know "I" would love to see pictures of my family from generations back. So I see it as important.
At this point I don't have the facilities for scanning that number of slides and negatives, so at this point I am doing nothing much but thinking, but I do think its important.
HOWEVER, once done the ones I have, I don't see much future purpose for the capability.
#6. "RE: Do you scan old or new?" | In response to Reply # 3Mon 27-Feb-12 11:44 PM
I agree that current and future generations will benefit from preserving those photos by scanning them. I have spent a lot of time scanning old beat-up prints of prior generations of family photos because the negatives are not available. I have also spent hundreds of hours scanning my old film shot over a period of over 40 years.
May I suggest that you buy a dedicated quality film scanner (there are still some Nikon Coolscan 9000s available) and get busy scanning those negatives.
#8. "RE: Do you scan old or new?" | In response to Reply # 0
I still use my Konica Minolta Dimage Elite 5400 II with Vuescan which I bought years ago after concluding it was better than the competitor product from Nikon.
Since then KM was aquired by Sony and they eventually stopped supporting the product while Nikon still supports their scanners; but luckly for me the darn thing still works like the way it did on day one!
#9. "RE: Do you scan old or new?" | In response to Reply # 8mpappa Nikonian since 12th Jan 2009Tue 28-Feb-12 05:25 PM
I shoot mostly digital, but I like shooting film as well. I use my Coolscan V to scan both old and new film. My dad was in the retail end of photography for most of his life, so I have Kodachrome slides dating back to 1942. I have scanned all his slides up until 1965 or so. I scan all the film that I shoot (all slides) with the Coolscan V. So as you can see, my scanner is, and will continue to be, pretty busy.
Visit my Nikonians gallery.