Shoot Film and Scan!

[meatboy]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Film scans print better than they look on screen.

 

Marc,

 

Thanks for passing on your experience here. Much appreciated. The end print is what its all about and I really like the results that I have seen from scanned and printed film.

 

I think I need to spend some more time working with the Minolta 5400 to extract its best.

 

Tim

[gfspencer]

Thanks (largely) to this thread, I just ordered a Nikon Coolscan V ED. It's supposed to ship Monday.

[mwilliamsphotography]

Best luck to all.

 

And don't be afraid to process your own B&W films. It's actually pretty easy, requires minimal equipment and can be done without a darkroom. Then on to the scanner and printer.

 

Take a look at Crains Museo Silver RAG inkjet paper ... it looks and feels like a Silverprint.

B&H carries it.

[abrewer]

Take a look at Crains Museo Silver RAG inkjet paper ... it looks and feels like a Silverprint.

 

Agreed Marc.

 

CMS RAG is a great product. Only caveat is the thickness may be difficult to pass through the rollers of your home printer...so beware the first time you print with it.

 

I learned that firsthand!

 

 

You can order it directly through Crane if your photo dealer doesn't carry it:

 

Crane Museo Silver RAG

 

Thanks.

 

Allan

[budrichard]

I just have the photofinsher (Dwyane's Photo) scan both my Kodachromes and Tri-x and TMAX 400. Send the scans to the printer over the Internet. Works great. The problem is that no one does direct film to paper anymore commercially and the digital papers do not have the tonal range of the old papers. -Dick

[strick]

Thanks for this thread which encourages me to stay on the shoot'n'scan-way and feel pretty good there :-)

 

Best,

Greg

[shikuro]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Is a printed scanned film considered a digital print? When you print a scanned film, how does it compare to one thats done traditionally or at the lab? Assuming you have a decent printer and scanner.

 

I guess, I'm just curious if a scanned film will look and print like digital after some basic curves and levels adjustment on Photoshop

[ennjott]

The problem with scanning is that it's impossible to extract all information that is in the emulsion with normal equipment. Even an 11000 DPI drum scanner only yields a final result of below 10 MP with a 80 lp/mm film (=~ 40 MP) negative or slide. A CCD scanner is no match for any currently used sensor. And forget flatbeds for small format.

 

Of course resolution isn't everything and the scans will usually be good enough. And there are better & more flexible solutions than with the current digital cameras. Pocket cameras with a bright fixed focal lens etc.. lots of stuff one cannot find in current product portfolios.

 

@shikuro:

Scanned film keeps the typical "film look" unless you counter it with post-processing.

[hamey]

Shot Film and Scan.

 

I have always been a true believer in that Philosophy.

 

With my Film Transparancies (Slides)

 

1... Easily stored.

2... Great for projection.

3... No problems in scanning them into a Digital file,

......or worrying about computer firmwere updates.

4... Can be turned into a photo print.

5... Can be viewed at anytime without the aid of Electric or Battery current.

 

NEED I SAY MORE.

 

Cheers.

[mwilliamsphotography]

The problem with scanning is that it's impossible to extract all information that is in the emulsion with normal equipment. Even an 11000 DPI drum scanner only yields a final result of below 10 MP with a 80 lp/mm film (=~ 40 MP) negative or slide. A CCD scanner is no match for any currently used sensor. And forget flatbeds for small format.

 

Of course resolution isn't everything and the scans will usually be good enough. And there are better & more flexible solutions than with the current digital cameras. Pocket cameras with a bright fixed focal lens etc.. lots of stuff one cannot find in current product portfolios.

 

@shikuro:

Scanned film keeps the typical "film look" unless you counter it with post-processing.

 

Could you elaborate on how a 11000 dpi scanner only yeilds a final result below 10 meg ?

 

And ... a CCD scanner is no match for any current used sensor ... what does that mean? What "current used sensor"?

[peter55]

I have an inexpensive dedicated film scanner and the results are excellent. When I compare my scanned images against my Canon 1Ds Mark II files there is not a whole lot of difference. So I don't think $ spent always = better, at least not enough to make a any difference.

I paid $189 at Newegg.com but there are other places to get the same cost. My scanner is the Plustek OpticFilm 7200 and comes with SilverFast LE. The software has dust and scratch removal.

I scan at 300dpi and output size 8" x 10" and also 2400dpi at 4"x 6" output, in reality this this is the same file size.

I print at home using the HP8750 at 13" x 19" in tri-color B&W and also in 9 color ink jet.

 

As far as scanner and printers go perhaps I would loose out in a juried art exhibition because of the above equipment that I'm using, then again I may win. Moot point for now as I have not yet entered any exhibitions.

 

My camera that I use the most among other cameras and lenses is a Leica M5 and 50mm f/1.4 Summilux

[imported_peter_m]

I am with you Peter,

 

I am in the same boat got a relative inexpensive film scanner and the results are not bad. OK with a high end scanner the results might be a lot better but it all is a question on how much you can spend on it.

 

With film you do have something real in your hands specially if things like this come up Microsoft move could be the end of the JPEG

 

Peter

[dfbldwn]

I owe a lot to abrewer and lambroving for posting splendid examples of what can be achieved with Kodak 400UC and 100UC, especially when scanned by a Noritsu machine, as abrewer recommended in a post some time ago.

 

Originally I planned to use 400UC as my chromogenic B&W film, since I found it far better made than XP2 Super or the Kodak "B+W".

 

Unfortunately, the family loved the color prints from a Noritsu machine. This increased my processing costs considerably.

 

So, if you've run out of time to scan yourself, I can state that scans from my local pharmacy's Noritsu machine are the first scans that are so good I no longer feel compelled to rescan the film at home.

[sdai]

Unfortunately, the family loved the color prints from a Noritsu machine. This increased my processing costs considerably.

 

This doesn't make sense, David ... 400UC and BW400CN are all C41 films and the costs of processing should be the same, am I missing something here?

[dfbldwn]

This doesn't make sense, David ... 400UC and BW400CN are all C41 films and the costs of processing should be the same, am I missing something here?

 

I regret my clumsiness of expression.

 

I used to order a basic PROCESS + SCAN.

 

Now I have to order PROCESS + COLOR PRINTS + SCAN, which increases a $6.00 total charge to just under $20 for a 36-exposure roll.

 

The Noritsu color prints are better than what I can do at home ... if you can tolerate occasionally blown highlights and ubiquitous over-saturated colors. My family strongly prefers them.

 

Worse yet, they even like the strange orange (they call it "golden") tones on the grandchildren's skin tones when shot in incandescent lights.

 

My main points were that the 1-hour Processing's Noritsu scans really impress me, and 400UC is a very legitimate alternative for B&W prints when I compare with B&W C-41 process films like XP2 Super and BW400CN.

 

My whole plan was foiled when family caught sight of the color prints.

 

By the way, I've enjoyed the intelligence of your posts in the Leica Forum for some time. Keep it up.

- David

[sdai]

Thanks a lot for your kind words and explanation, David ... I find I'm basically in a similar situation of yours - it's hard to convince my family to love those black and white stuff, they just don't buy my "B&W will last longer" theory.

 

Cheers,

[gfspencer]

Thanks (largely) to this thread, I just ordered a Nikon Coolscan V ED. It's supposed to ship Monday.

 

 

The Nikon Coolscan came yesterday. I think I've got a lot to learn. My first efforts were just okay.

[stunsworth]

George, if you have any specific questions or problems ask. You'll find people very helpful. If you can post examples illustrating any issues you may have.

 

Scanning can be a bit of an uphill struggle at first, but it isn't that difficult to get good results.

[abrewer]

I owe a lot to abrewer and lambroving for posting splendid examples of what can be achieved with Kodak 400UC and 100UC, especially when scanned by a Noritsu machine, as abrewer recommended in a post some time ago.

 

 

Thank you David.

 

Welcome to the Forum, BTW!

 

Let me update that info a little bit.

 

As I passed through Target with my wife I noticed they were advertising Kodak Perfect Touch finishing and, indeed, they had a brand new Kodak digital processor there on the site. I tried it and it is even better than than the results I received from the film lab with the Noritsu. In particular, the reds were true without the scarlet shift I'd noticed in the prints and scans.

 

If you've got a big Target near you (I know, it's NE Georgia!) you should breeze through and take look in their Photo Processing area (not the electronics area where the cameras are). The charge was south of $20 by a few bucks, too.

 

Thanks.

 

Allan

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[abrewer]

 

As far as scanner and printers go perhaps I would loose out in a juried art exhibition because of the above equipment that I'm using, then again I may win. Moot point for now as I have not yet entered any exhibitions.

 

My camera that I use the most among other cameras and lenses is a Leica M5 and 50mm f/1.4 Summilux

 

Great set-up Peter. Is it the current 50 ASPH or the previous one? Either way, an excellent kit for just about any situation.

 

I encourage anyone that's not seen them to look into the HP2400 as a printer, one of several in that particular HP range. They are excellent.

 

Bob Rudolph, an excellent B&W photog near me, uses one of their larger models in this range to excellent result with his images. They are certainly exhibition quality. Perhaps Bob will chime in here.

 

Thanks.

 

Allan