What methods do you use for digitizing film photos

[dtusk]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It has been a long time since I shot film.  I am considering getting back into it, but have no idea how you guys get your film photos converted to digital to post on this forum and other platforms like Flickr.  So, before I drop the cash on a MP or M-A ( The two cameras I am considering) what methods do some of you use to accomplish this?  Any info would be greatly. appreciated.  Thanks!

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[pegelli]

I mainly shoot B&W film, develop myself and then scan the negatives with an Epson V700 photo (flatbed).

The scanned negatives are then imported in Lightroom and converted to positive with Negative Lab Pro (plugin) and further processed to taste.

I have also scanned colour slides and colour negatives and basically use the same workflow (only slides don't need the negative to positive step).

[TomB_tx]

Depends on whether you plan to do your own processing or not, and whether B&W or color. I have normally sent/taken color film to be processed commercially, and most places will scan and provide files either for download or CD. That was very convenient when there were 1-hour photo labs all over. More recently that has meant (in my case) mailing the film off and waiting for processing, and lately some $20 just for 2-way postage, in addition to the processing fee.

I've processed my own B&W for 50+ years, which is very easy in a spare bathroom. While I still have my enlarger set up for making prints, I seldom bother with it, and just scan the roll with an Epson V850 flatbed (used to use V700) which can scan 18 to 24 exposures with a single button click, and quality is fine for viewing on monitor or uploading. I've also used the V850 to re-scan color when I thought the lab scans could be improved. I usually do almost no post-processing, as the Epson Scan software does an acceptable job for me,

I've also experimented with "camera scanning" using a digital camera on a stand with a back-lit negative carrier and macro lens. This can give very good results, but takes more post processing than I care to do.

Just recently I came back to processing color film and scanning it with the Epson, and have been very pleased with the results, which are as good as I've had from commercial "standard" scans. Pro labs can also do custom scans at very high resolution, but I don't have a need for that. Color is a bit more involved, as must be done at closely controlled elevated temperature (typically 102 F) - but there are now some nifty water-bath systems that make that feasible for home use as well.

[GregNski]

I scan color negatives, color slides, and b&w negatives on my Plustek OpticFilm 8100 scanner. It does a very nice job. The only thing you need to watch out for is that scanning will increase the contrast of the image if your settings aren't right. It takes some fiddling to get the scanner dialed in correctly, and every type of film behaves a little differently.

[Tom R]

I depend on a professional Lab for color processing and initial scanning. Alternatively, circumstances permitting, I use an old Leica M8.2 to make color DNG files (the M 8.2 is NOT Leica’s latest and greatest, but I have no interest in doing much with color or digital process, and even less interest in re-mortgaging my home …), and use an old copy of CaptureOne (version 20) to handle any post-processing. [When I can no longer use the CaptureOne software (which will happen, I’m sure, as they are moving to the ransom-ware model) I can use Affinity 2 (or Gimp?) to do what little color editing I would require.]

Most typically (weekly), I process B+W at home. I own two scanners: a PrimeFilm XA SE, and a Plustek 8200i. I use Silverfast software for both scanners. After processing and drying, films are cut into strips of six and scanned to JPEG  on the PrimeFilm XA; these are my contact sheets.  (Note: some people have had problems with this particular scanner: limiting the number of consecutive scans to six frames, however, has worked for me. Attempting to scan a complete 36 frames would likely be problematic.)

From the contact sheets, I select the candidates for the next step: scanning to TIFF, which is done on the PlusTek @ 3600 dpi. I can use either the SilverFast or the Vuescan software tools to do this—it depends on how much work I want to do in Post Processing (getting the scans to approximate the actual film used, e.g., making Tri-X scans look like Tri-X positives, etc.).

These TIFF files are my Selects, and from these Selects, I choose final images, which are edited in Affinity (mostly scratch and dust removal, using the various Healing and Inpainting brushes. For final export to JPEGs, I use NIK SilverFast (and in some instances NIK Dfine) plugins and export (from Affinity) to sized JPEGs (using Lanczos 3 for resampling).

To manage these various directories of JPEGs, DNG, and TIFFs, I use PhotoMechanic Plus. This software is not cheap, but it saves me a lot of time and space by providing a suite of metadata editing, searching, filtering, etc. capabilities, and a relational DB back-end that I find greatly facilitates the entire workflow.

 

[frame-it]

1 hour ago, dtusk said:

It has been a long time since I shot film.  I am considering getting back into it, but have no idea how you guys get your film photos converted to digital to post on this forum and other platforms like Flickr.  So, before I drop the cash on a MP or M-A ( The two cameras I am considering) what methods do some of you use to accomplish this?  Any info would be greatly. appreciated.  Thanks!

 

 

 

 

[rogxwhit]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've been scanning 35mm film since 2001 using in succession a couple of Nikon film scanners.  They are still available second hand, and whereas the earlier ones required a scsi connection, later ones used firewire, and then USB.  I used Nikon Scan on Windows and found the colour neg reversals very good.  All the Nikon scanners as far as I know had an 'analogue gain' adjustment that could be used to compensate originals that were too dark or light and bring the tonal range into bounds.   My earliest scanner, the LS2000, which was scsi, had a multi-pass function that could dig shadow detail out of an over-dense colour slide whilst not resulting in too much noise.  There was also Digital ICE for virtual dust removal.

These days, Nikon Scan 4, the final software version, will run fine on W11, but the drivers are outmoded - however Vuescan or Silverfast will provide a driver, and either of these Apps is also available for Mac OS. 

On one occasion I had a medium format colour neg film scanned by a lab and the highlights in the scans were blown, whereas with the negs on a lightbox (and a loupe) I could see detail in the same areas.  So I came to the conclusion that in-house is best because of the afforded control.

I've never done camera scanning.

[alnejadah]

I use LEITZ BEOON copy stand with digital m and 50mm lens on LED light box to digitalize the negatives, then convert them to positives using Light room classic plug negative lab pro.

[costa43]

I use the Valoi easy35 with an SL2s and 70mm Sigma macro. I link the Leica fotos app for remote electronic shutter release. It takes a couple of minutes to scan the roll and it's as sharp as you would ever want it to be. I convert the negative with Negative Lab Pro

[spydrxx]

If you do a search you will find numerous comments on this issue, mostly split between using a scanner or a digital camera with a macro capable lens. As commented previously, I've used two different scanners, but about 4-5 years ago switched to using a mirrorless camera with a macro lens. I constructed my own lightbox and negative flattening system (I'm too cheap to purchase costly gear) which has worked IMHO as well as some of the more touted gear. I've been very satisfied with the results and actually printed (I should say "had" printed) several shots approximately 3x4 ft. I think the camera vs scanner is quicker and more efficient

[Danner]

I use my iPhone to take a picture of a photographic print.  Light it from the sides and hold the iPhone parallel to the print.

My 2¢

[FrozenInTime]

1 hour ago, costa43 said:

I use the Valoi easy35 with an SL2s and 70mm Sigma macro. I link the Leica fotos app for remote electronic shutter release. It takes a couple of minutes to scan the roll and it's as sharp as you would ever want it to be. I convert the negative with Negative Lab Pro

UPS just delivered me one of these earlier today; the brochure promises it will eliminate the parallelism and alignment hassle inherent to the macro lens on a copy stand method.

[costa43]

25 minutes ago, FrozenInTime said:

UPS just delivered me one of these earlier today; the brochure promises it will eliminate the parallelism and alignment hassle inherent to the macro lens on a copy stand method.

Nice, it’s a great bit of kit. It’s so small and portable too, it will go in my camera bag for my Greece trip next month. 

[250swb]

33 minutes ago, FrozenInTime said:

UPS just delivered me one of these earlier today; the brochure promises it will eliminate the parallelism and alignment hassle inherent to the macro lens on a copy stand method.

Download a free phone app with a surface level/bubble level and lay your phone on the LCD screen to level the camera on a copy stand. 

[dtusk]

Thanks for all the responses.  I would not be developing my own film, so I think I would try scanning negatives with a scanner.  That sounds the most appealing to me right now given I have zero experience in this area.  Way back when I shot film, I never developed my own but was always very happy with the shop I sued at the time and still have lots of great photos from then.  Now I at least have a clear idea of what I will be facing if I decide to give this a try.  Thanks everyone. 

4 hours ago, TomB_tx said:

Depends on whether you plan to do your own processing or not, and whether B&W or color. I have normally sent/taken color film to be processed commercially, and most places will scan and provide files either for download or CD. That was very convenient when there were 1-hour photo labs all over. More recently that has meant (in my case) mailing the film off and waiting for processing, and lately some $20 just for 2-way postage, in addition to the processing fee.

I've processed my own B&W for 50+ years, which is very easy in a spare bathroom. While I still have my enlarger set up for making prints, I seldom bother with it, and just scan the roll with an Epson V850 flatbed (used to use V700) which can scan 18 to 24 exposures with a single button click, and quality is fine for viewing on monitor or uploading. I've also used the V850 to re-scan color when I thought the lab scans could be improved. I usually do almost no post-processing, as the Epson Scan software does an acceptable job for me,

I've also experimented with "camera scanning" using a digital camera on a stand with a back-lit negative carrier and macro lens. This can give very good results, but takes more post processing than I care to do.

Just recently I came back to processing color film and scanning it with the Epson, and have been very pleased with the results, which are as good as I've had from commercial "standard" scans. Pro labs can also do custom scans at very high resolution, but I don't have a need for that. Color is a bit more involved, as must be done at closely controlled elevated temperature (typically 102 F) - but there are now some nifty water-bath systems that make that feasible for home use as well.

 

3 hours ago, GregNski said:

I scan color negatives, color slides, and b&w negatives on my Plustek OpticFilm 8100 scanner. It does a very nice job. The only thing you need to watch out for is that scanning will increase the contrast of the image if your settings aren't right. It takes some fiddling to get the scanner dialed in correctly, and every type of film behaves a little differently.

 

3 hours ago, Tom R said:

I depend on a professional Lab for color processing and initial scanning. Alternatively, circumstances permitting, I use an old Leica M8.2 to make color DNG files (the M 8.2 is NOT Leica’s latest and greatest, but I have no interest in doing much with color or digital process, and even less interest in re-mortgaging my home …), and use an old copy of CaptureOne (version 20) to handle any post-processing. [When I can no longer use the CaptureOne software (which will happen, I’m sure, as they are moving to the ransom-ware model) I can use Affinity 2 (or Gimp?) to do what little color editing I would require.]

Most typically (weekly), I process B+W at home. I own two scanners: a PrimeFilm XA SE, and a Plustek 8200i. I use Silverfast software for both scanners. After processing and drying, films are cut into strips of six and scanned to JPEG  on the PrimeFilm XA; these are my contact sheets.  (Note: some people have had problems with this particular scanner: limiting the number of consecutive scans to six frames, however, has worked for me. Attempting to scan a complete 36 frames would likely be problematic.)

From the contact sheets, I select the candidates for the next step: scanning to TIFF, which is done on the PlusTek @ 3600 dpi. I can use either the SilverFast or the Vuescan software tools to do this—it depends on how much work I want to do in Post Processing (getting the scans to approximate the actual film used, e.g., making Tri-X scans look like Tri-X positives, etc.).

These TIFF files are my Selects, and from these Selects, I choose final images, which are edited in Affinity (mostly scratch and dust removal, using the various Healing and Inpainting brushes. For final export to JPEGs, I use NIK SilverFast (and in some instances NIK Dfine) plugins and export (from Affinity) to sized JPEGs (using Lanczos 3 for resampling).

To manage these various directories of JPEGs, DNG, and TIFFs, I use PhotoMechanic Plus. This software is not cheap, but it saves me a lot of time and space by providing a suite of metadata editing, searching, filtering, etc. capabilities, and a relational DB back-end that I find greatly facilitates the entire workflow.

 

 

3 hours ago, rogxwhit said:

I've been scanning 35mm film since 2001 using in succession a couple of Nikon film scanners.  They are still available second hand, and whereas the earlier ones required a scsi connection, later ones used firewire, and then USB.  I used Nikon Scan on Windows and found the colour neg reversals very good.  All the Nikon scanners as far as I know had an 'analogue gain' adjustment that could be used to compensate originals that were too dark or light and bring the tonal range into bounds.   My earliest scanner, the LS2000, which was scsi, had a multi-pass function that could dig shadow detail out of an over-dense colour slide whilst not resulting in too much noise.  There was also Digital ICE for virtual dust removal.

These days, Nikon Scan 4, the final software version, will run fine on W11, but the drivers are outmoded - however Vuescan or Silverfast will provide a driver, and either of these Apps is also available for Mac OS. 

On one occasion I had a medium format colour neg film scanned by a lab and the highlights in the scans were blown, whereas with the negs on a lightbox (and a loupe) I could see detail in the same areas.  So I came to the conclusion that in-house is best because of the afforded control.

I've never done camera scanning.

 

4 hours ago, pegelli said:

I mainly shoot B&W film, develop myself and then scan the negatives with an Epson V700 photo (flatbed).

The scanned negatives are then imported in Lightroom and converted to positive with Negative Lab Pro (plugin) and further processed to taste.

I have also scanned colour slides and colour negatives and basically use the same workflow (only slides don't need the negative to positive step).

 

[plaidshirts]

I’ve tried different scanners and digital cameras as well. The best setup I’ve found  for 35mm is a Nikon Coolscan 5000 with and sa-30 adapter that scans a full roll using Nikonscan software. I used Vuescan before that but NS is easier to use (once you get used to it) and has better IQ. 

Since there aren’t any film shops that are close enough, I ship mine out of state for processing. 
I found a couple places in CA and KY that are reliable and economical. 

[Anbaric]

I have an old film scanner, but I get my scans done commercially by the developing service, because they have a better scanner (Noriku or Fuji Frontier) than I do and the cost is reasonable for the amount of work I would otherwise have to do. The trick is to find somewhere that gives good results at a decent price. Here in the UK, some of the pro labs charge a fortune for scanning even when their developing cost is reasonable, while the remaining high street processors often give you low resolution scans unless you pay a hefty premium. I've found a mail order lab (Filmdev) that does a very decent job for the money and can provide the full resolution output of the scanner for less than some places charge for low res files. I'm sure there must be similar places in the US.

[Crem]

On 8/7/2024 at 7:06 AM, dtusk said:

It has been a long time since I shot film.  I am considering getting back into it, but have no idea how you guys get your film photos converted to digital to post on this forum and other platforms like Flickr.  So, before I drop the cash on a MP or M-A ( The two cameras I am considering) what methods do some of you use to accomplish this?  Any info would be greatly. appreciated.  Thanks!

I've been camera scanning (color and B&W) for 3 or so years mostly due to speed compared to traditional scanners. I've tried many solutions, but I have settled on: Valoi Easy 35 + Sigma 105mm 2.8 Macro + Leica SL2-S to get RAW files on my computer. I then invert them with Negative Lab Pro and sometimes edit the jpegs using Lightroom Classic. Overall it's very painless to quickly scan an entire roll of negatives assuming they are clean of dust. Most of the time goes into adjusting the scans in Negative Lab Pro since I find every frame needs a bit of adjustment. There is also a learning curve to Negative Lab Pro. It's kind of like the first time you had to learn how to use Lightroom to edit a digital RAW file. I almost went with traditional scanners, but decided against it as I wanted to optimize for my time. I believe you can get great results using either method, but I think the only thing faster than the Easy 35 is a pro grade lab scanner like a Frontier. Also previous to the Easy 35 I used a copy stand + Essential Film Holder. I really have no desire to go back to the copy stand after using the Easy 35.

Edited August 8, 2024 by Crem

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[250swb]

On 8/7/2024 at 7:56 PM, dtusk said:

Thanks for all the responses.  I would not be developing my own film, so I think I would try scanning negatives with a scanner.  That sounds the most appealing to me right now given I have zero experience in this area.  Way back when I shot film, I never developed my own but was always very happy with the shop I sued at the time and still have lots of great photos from then.  Now I at least have a clear idea of what I will be facing if I decide to give this a try.  Thanks everyone. 

It really depends on what you want to do with your negatives, use them for prints, or just to post pictures on the internet. But given you are already facing the extra costs of a lab processing your films there are a few more ways to look at it.

The first is if the lab can do a relatively low resolution contact sheet for you you can choose which photos you want at full resolution and only have them scan those. After all it's like when people complain about endless post processing of all their photos, in reality you are only meant to do the good ones and three or four from a roll of 36 was a good hit rate for Cartier  Bresson.

The second consideration is the choice of film scanner is paramount if you go that route. The very easy to use (so tempting) Epson flatbed scanners, the V700, V750, V800, V850, are very poor for scanning 35mm. The Epson headline resolution figure for the V850 is 6400ppi, yet the actual resolution after which there is no improvement in quality is only 4800ppi, all that happens is the file gets much bigger. And this resolution drops to a lowly 2300ppi when a 35mm negative is scanned, which is no better than an 8 megapixel camera, but ok for the internet.

So you don't need a fancy digital camera to vastly improve over an Epson flatbed scanner if you are scanning 35mm. And the headline figures for many other popular dedicated film scanners tell a similar story. So an old full-frame Nikon with 16 or 18 megapixels and a good 1:1 macro lens (a Nikon 60mm micro is good) is going to be a similar price as an Epson scanner, and deliver better quality, and you get a digital camera out of the deal as well. And even if you scan everything at full resolution as a RAW file you can do it in minutes, which eventually adds up to saving hours over a dedicated film scanner. The only extras you need are a cheap copy stand, a light source, and you can make your own negative holders or buy one. There are many plugin negative inversion apps now available, just choose the easiest, none are yet perfect because they can't read your mind, and remember there isn't much post processing to do because your self editing means there's only 3 or 4 to worry about.

Edited August 9, 2024 by 250swb

[Smudgerer]

I use TriX/HP5+/FP4+ and home process the negatives, ( I upgraded my old creaky Jobo CPE2 last year for a Filmomat "automatic" film processor ). After process and drying the film I can take two routes, the first I can scan the whole roll using a Reflecta RPS 10M scanner with the first scans at a low resolution but good enough to be able to choose my "picks" for a re-scan at a high resolution, ( the Reflecta does give a pretty good output, I am well pleased with that machine ). I either use Reflecta's basic scanning software which is good enough for "proofing" or I use Silverfast SE and try to remember how to get through the ugly and confusing user interface every time I open it up.

The second and for me better option is to cut the film roll into 5 or 6 frame strips, put them into clear negative sleeves, lay them onto a LCD light panel under glass and using a digital camera / macro combination, ( copy stand + GH4 with a 7A macro lens ), shoot a "contact sheet" that is inverted simply in LR Classic and printed out on A4 paper via my Epson P700. This way it is more "muscle memory" easier for me to select my picks, if any, and make a full resolution scan/s on either a Nikon 4000ED or a Plustek 8200i. The other advantage of printing out a contact sheet is that it can be filed along with / clipped to the sleeved negatives thus making neater access to the images down the road.

Edited August 9, 2024 by Smudgerer