menos I M6 Posted February 28, 2016 Share #41 Posted February 28, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) Negatives/slides are the original images to archive and keep. Any scan or print done from a negative or slide is only a temporary image developed from that original. The film is to keep and will provide better and better images made from it over time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 28, 2016 Posted February 28, 2016 Hi menos I M6, Take a look here Do you keep your negatives after scanning?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
FredR Posted March 3, 2016 Share #42 Posted March 3, 2016 The negative is the best image to draw from, better than its secondary digital scan. That's the whole point. Keep the negative. Fred Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
atournas Posted March 5, 2016 Share #43 Posted March 5, 2016 Never throw negs away. Besides archival, better re-scanning in the future and the like, they can also act as a record of your "shooting flow" in documentary and street photography. Slides is another story--I personally keep only the "keepers", namely, between none and a couple slides out of film Paul Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sblitz Posted March 5, 2016 Share #44 Posted March 5, 2016 Never throw negs away. Besides archival, better re-scanning in the future and the like, they can also act as a record of your "shooting flow" in documentary and street photography. Slides is another story--I personally keep only the "keepers", namely, between none and a couple slides out of film Paul If you don't throw out negatives not sure how you can justify throwing out slides? Especially today, when slide film is developed and unmounted so i comes back in strips just like negatives. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
atournas Posted March 5, 2016 Share #45 Posted March 5, 2016 If you don't throw out negatives not sure how you can justify throwing out slides? Especially today, when slide film is developed and unmounted so i comes back in strips just like negatives. I see your point, but I only described my own policy. As a matter of fact, I do the same with digital shots. Most of the time, the reasons are false exposure (so easily done with slides or sensors) or overvalued composition. I pick up the few that appeal to me during the first inspection. I try to follow some strict critique rules I learned to rely on. A weak shot will remain a weak shot, I assume you agree with that. No reason for this to sound like a good practice to other photographers, of course. Paul Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sblitz Posted March 5, 2016 Share #46 Posted March 5, 2016 I agree. But it is interesting when I know look at slides I took 35 years ago my opinion has changed and am glad the only ones I tossed with the misfocused and obviously too far over or underexposed Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
atournas Posted March 5, 2016 Share #47 Posted March 5, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) I agree. But it is interesting when I know look at slides I took 35 years ago my opinion has changed and am glad the only ones I tossed with the misfocused and obviously too far over or underexposed Steve, As for that, I totally agree with you. I know the risk I'm taking with not giving them (slides, digital shots) a second chance. I'm glad that I usually forget what I've thrown away! Paul Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicaphilia Posted March 12, 2016 Share #48 Posted March 12, 2016 I'm currently scanning negatives I sleeved in the early 70's. Digital files I captured justva few years ago are now unreadable. so yes, keep your negatives. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matlock Posted March 12, 2016 Share #49 Posted March 12, 2016 I'm currently scanning negatives I sleeved in the early 70's. Digital files I captured justva few years ago are now unreadable. so yes, keep your negatives. Fully agree. Photo CDs which I had just a few years ago are unreadable (thank goodness I kept the negatives). I would suggest that, if you have photo CDs with your developed films, you save on your computer and back up regularly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sblitz Posted March 12, 2016 Share #50 Posted March 12, 2016 Curious, what happened to the CDs to make them unreadable? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted March 12, 2016 Share #51 Posted March 12, 2016 Curious, what happened to the CDs to make them unreadable? Oxidation or atmospheric gasses attacking the surface. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sblitz Posted March 12, 2016 Share #52 Posted March 12, 2016 If kept in a draw in the case? I have old audits CDs that are just fine. To my ears at least Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matlock Posted March 13, 2016 Share #53 Posted March 13, 2016 Curious, what happened to the CDs to make them unreadable? Kept in light tight containers but all frames pixalated when I tried to open them. This did not affect all disks, as the Kodak CDs are OK but those produced by a couple of independent processors are unreadable. Strange! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted March 13, 2016 Share #54 Posted March 13, 2016 There are CDs of wildly differing quality. This applies to both pressed music CDs and burned data CDs. The photo CD by Kodak is a CD containing data and it's burned in a CD writer. Your ordinary data CD is rated for about ten or fifteen years. After that, you can expect them to fail. Failure most usually manifests itself by single blocks becoming unreadable. That could account for "pixellated" images, when the blocks containing details of parts of an image can not be read any more. The most spectacular failure of a CD happened to me when the coating fell off a CD in one piece. I had stored that particular CD with a post-it note attached to its back side. Writing on a CD with a fiber tip might also damage the coating. Kodak sold CDs for "normal" use as well as CDs rated for archival purposes. They rated those for 50 or 100 years. I think the photo CDs might be of that quality. If you have any photo CDs you want to keep for more time to come, I think copying them to a hard disk might be a good idea. Music CDs are pressed and not burned. However, I even have found some music CDs where the coating became defective after a few years, rendering the CD unreadable. Be aware that some very small outfits might burn their CDs instead of pressing them; that would make them vulnerable in the same way as any CD written to by a CD drive. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.