jim_long5 Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 <p>I am thinking of shooting some film with my beautiful LTM's and old lenses. How many of you request digital conversion of images immediately when having film processes? I am getting lazy and don't want to have to catalog pictures.</p> <p>Jim</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve_bellayr Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 <p>Good question! Aren't there different levels of quality in scan?</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCL Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 <p>I always have a CD made when I have film processed...even though the scan is only 1-2 megabytes, I use it as a video catalog. When I'm not too lazy, I also import the images into PS and do a contact sheet. If I want to print out a picture, I then scan the actual negative at much higher resolution on my scanner.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
furcafe Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 <p>I shoot (mostly) film & scan my slides/negs using a Minolta Dimage Scan Multi Pro & a Nikon Super Coolscan 5000, so not much help if you're truly lazy.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charles_stobbs3 Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 I sometimes request a CD when I drop off film. Drugstore scans are good enough for email. When I send transparencies to Dwayne's I also some times ask for a CD because I know they do a good job. Otherwise I scan my own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zane1664879013 Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 <p>Develop and low-res scans on CD (no prints) at Sam's Club (in USA) costs only $2.25. If I happen to get a really good shot I'll rescan the frame myself at high res. Cheap!</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andylynn Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 <p>I have film scans done with developing all the time. For casual stuff, the CVS near me does a pretty decent (though low res) job but if I shot something I care about I probably used Portra film and I go to a local shop that does 20MB TIFF files on DVD and is very good at not scratching negatives. (Cameras Inc. if you happen to live near Somerville or Arlington, MA - and they also do B&W and 120/220)</p> <p>Note of caution: there is no industry standard for color balance, contrast, etc. for film scanning. Some shops have the saturation and sharpening cranked up so high the photos end up looking like I used my DSLR in Vivid++ mode.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex_Es Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 <p>So far all the CD I've had from shops are awful. I do my own scanning. For batch scanning use a good flatbed scanner. For the best results use a dedicated scanner. </p> <p>I do my stealth street work exclusively with film. Much less obtrusive. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffrey L.T. von Glück Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 <p>I starting shooting K64 again. I figure I might as well enjoy it until Dwayne's gives up the ghost next year. I order a CD at the time of processing. The quality is pretty good. I know Dale Labs does CD scans for their E-6 work and negative stock, but I have not tried it yet. I just can't bring myself to buy a scanner and add yet another level of post-production work.</p> Jeffrey L. T. von Gluck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mendel_leisk Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 <p>Jim, from your wording it seems like you think the process of scanning your films, and that's what it is, will be automatic and absolute, ie: film in, digital out.</p> <p>In fact there are many variables to consider: the DPI you want the film scanned at, the amount of histogram stretching (how "punchy" do you want), color balance, the cleanliness (do you want the scanner to "spot" your scans, and how thoroughly?), how much are you willing to pay, what recourse if you're not happy, how fast do you want your scans, and so on.</p> <p>For quick, low resolution, unspotted, non-picky results it's likely worthwhile to have someone do it. OTOH, as your expectations and preferences rise so does expense, and the likelyhood of hassles when the scanner doesn't accomplish those expectations, to the point that you'd be better off plunging in and doing it yourself.</p> <p>If you've already gone digital, say shooting with a dslr, I'd say stick with it. I started out scanning film, this last time around, then went to a dslr. Didn't take me long to decide not to shoot any further film, just not worth the hassle.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frederick_muller Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 <p>I do this all the time. "Develop Only, and Scan-to-Disk". But I have had to move labs a couple of times to get the quality I want, and I have to specify hi-res and filesize. Ultimately the cost will go up and one will have to go to a pro lab to get the film done, but that's the way it goes. I expect one will pay for it, but one will also be able to be very specific about requirements and will get good quality.</p> <p>I do like film, though. I shoot about 60% digital and 40% film, though I go for spells where I shoot a lot more of one than the other. I find digital and film have very different "textures". Grain makes the film image, and "noise" ... ??? There are times I get to loving digital images, then I shoot a roll of film and get a real sense of pleasure when I see the film result.</p> <p>I also admit I like using my film machines too. Digital cameras feel big in my hands. Just handle a big Nikon DSLR hand-canon and then pick up a Nikon F, F2, or Canon F1. Those are big, heavy film cameras and they are slim and very ergonomic compared to a DSLR. I handle my RD-1s all day, then pick up a Leica M or Bessa R series and the ergonomic difference is immediately apparent. I will continue to shoot film just for the pleasure of using my film machines.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frederick_muller Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 <p>'</p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frederick_muller Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 <p>''</p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter_mann3 Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 <p>Buy a M8.2 and forget film. It is deader by the day. Just like glass plates, for example. Sorry, but times change and new technology becomes dominant and common sense.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter_keating1 Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 <p>Sounds like you want to work out with your LTM's. Until they make a digital Barnack, shoot film. If you want to shoot film, shoot film. Shooting film and scanning is a viable work flow.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andylynn Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 <p>Brilliant. Forget film, you'd have to pay a good $6 per roll for film, processing and scanning. Instead, you can have an M8.2 for only $6,000! (Plus lenses.)</p> <p>Just find a halfway decent shop and have some new school fun with your old school camera.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frederick_muller Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 <p>Well, I figure my RD-1s has paid for itself a couple of times over by now. But what is important is that enough people think film still gives results different enough from digital that they don't diss the medium. I know a guy who still lugs around an 8x10 view camera in the back of his Volvo station wagon on holiday! I have no idea where he gets his materials.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter_mann3 Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 <p>If you care anything about quality, if you care anything about ease of work flow, go DIGITAL. If you can't afford the Leica price, settle for some Nikon or Canon in your range and trade in your Leica film stuff. Film is getting deader every day. And good processing will become almost impossible to find, and the cost of prints made by labs outrageous. Get with the program. But if all you want is to play with your dear old equipment, for fondling perhaps, go for that and forget making any gorgeous long scale super sharp prints from your scans. If, perchance, you still do your own processing and printing, and enjoy long tedious hours in the darkroom, then stay with that by all means.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert lee Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 <p>Minilab scans tend to be pretty horrid.</p> <p>For color, I ask for development only and uncut film strip. Cost around my area is about $3 for C41 and $6 for E6. For B&W, I develop myself; development consumables is pennies per roll.</p> <p>I scan using a Nikon 5000 with a whole roll adapter. Feed in the entire strip of 36+ exposures and come back to digitized images in about an hour. I always scan at 4000dpi which gives roughly 20MP files.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim_long5 Posted August 26, 2009 Author Share Posted August 26, 2009 <p>All great and thought provoking comments. <br> I do have a Lumix G1 with Leica LTM and M adapters, so I can use old lenses and go directly to digital. It makes me sick that there are fewer and fewer reasons to pull out the LTM film bodies.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeff_livacich Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 <p><em>"If you care anything about quality... GO DIGITAL."</em><br> Gad. It never ends.</p> <p>Just use what you like.</p> <p><em>"Get with the program."</em><br> Yeah, gotta follow that program. If others are doing it, then it's gotta be what I do, too.<br> Sheesh.</p> <p> </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charleseagan Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 <p>I've tried and have been dissappointed with digital scans of negative film, both from my own scans and those I've requested from photo labs. And I use 120mm negative film. I just went digital, but I kept my negative film backs as a backup.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbm Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 If you find someone willing to take a little time at a local lab, you can get decent scans. Thefellow across the street from me gives solid 6mp equivalent scans from 35mm. With all setiings neutral, the film images are perfectly sharp without looking oversharp, a la dslr. This is all via a Noritsu scanner. If I want them to look even better I use a coolscan 5000, which gives great scans of lower ISO films suitable for medium size (10 x 15 inches) that have the texture and via scanning more continuous tones and better shadow detail than most dslr photos. The scans really look great. In some ways film is more time consuming as the results are not immediate but I have found the return to film has brought back a great deal of satisfaction. You can ignore Mr. Mann's comments, which are ignorant and do not answer your question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjscharp Posted August 27, 2009 Share Posted August 27, 2009 For negs, I have the lab make contacts, for slide I look at the slides. I then scan the most promising pictures on a Minolta Dimage Elite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ty_mickan Posted August 27, 2009 Share Posted August 27, 2009 <p>man i can't stand it when amatuer or hobbyist talk about 'workflow' or 'convenience' of digital. If you find the actual art of photography a chore, then find another hobby. are you that busy that you have to have your images available to you immediately, or is it that you just aren't competant in making successful images so you need an lcd for reassurance? do you have clients looking over your shoulder wanting to see the images as they are taken? if not, then you have been had by the marketing departments of nikon, canon, kodak et al. Jim don't let these 'digital imagers' distract you from actual photography. why not get your film developed by a pro lab like Richards, and get some beautiful high res scans that will make you wonder why you just spent so much money on the latest digicam. you want to shoot film for the same reason that big budget hollywood movies are still shot on film, it has "the look".</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now