joel_gomez Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 <p>Hey all.<br>I just got a hasselblad and shot about 10 rolls. I didnt get the film scanned, just got 4x4 proofs and scanned those. THEY CAME OUT TERRIBLE. Do most photographers get the film scanned when getting the rolls developed?<br>Check'em out. <br>jpgmag.com/people/jgmz</p><p>-Joel</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomas_sullivan Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 <p>I scan my medium format negatives using an Epson V700 Photo Scanner. I would love a Nikon 9000, but just can't afford it. The V700 does a good job if you can keep the negative flat.</p> <p>I've had a few rolls of 35mm scanned when I got them processed.....scans were horrid.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curt wiler Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 <p>With negative film, I get "digital proof sheets" when the film is developed - the lab does a relatively low resolution scan to make these, and provides the scans on a disc. This gets imported into my digital file system for indexing, and frankly is usually good enough for the web. For prints, I can select from either the paper proof sheet or the digital archives, and make a better scan from the film. This is another reason that I have switched to shooting color negative film almost exclusively in medium format.<br /> Scanning small prints is a lost cause unless there is no other recourse.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joel_gomez Posted August 28, 2009 Author Share Posted August 28, 2009 <p>I figured that. <br> I want the digital for online posting & my website. cool. I guess I'll have them scanned. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicaglow Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 <p>Joel, all the Hasselblad (square) shots in my portfolio are done on an Epson 4490 (the version prior to v500), and they show pretty well as prints up to 20x20". The scanner is very cheap compared to the price of your camera. That's the way you should go.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_littleboy__tokyo__ja Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 <p>"The scanner is very cheap compared to the price of your camera. "</p> <p>The V500 and lower end scanners are, but since you can get a 'blad kit for well under US$900, the price of the V700 and V750 are getting up there.</p> <p>I'm beginning to sound like a shill for betterscanning.com, but their MF adjustable-height film holder (with the AN glass) is quite nice. At least my V700 is _increadibly_ sensitive to film height and that film holder makes adjusting carefully possible. (Grumble: the betterscanning holder supports the film on two sides and you push it flat with the AN glass. But what one wants is to support the negative on all four edges and press it flat. But this is hard because there are multiple size you need to scan and different cameras have different flm spacings. Sigh. So betterscanning is as good as it's reasonable to get.)</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