Help! Scanning large collection of 4X5 B&W and 35mm

[matthew_allen3]

<p>I'm beginning the long process of scanning my grandfather's half million negatives. He was a professional photog for 60 years in the Southeast. Our family wants to get this collection scanned and archived as many of his clients are interested in his work. (Coca Cola, Grand Ole Opry etc...) <br>

Need any helpful advice on good quality scanners for multi format. The ability to scan high res copies of the 4X5 is a must. I would also need the scanner to be capable of 35mm negatives both B&W and color. <br>

Any help and advice would be GREATLY appreciated. And YES, I already know what I am up against. It will be a tedious and time consuming task. <br>

Thanks!<br>

Matt</p>

 

[lambertus_s._hofstra1]

<p>A daunting task indeed.<br>

Have a look at the Epson flatbedscanners, lik this one: <br>

http://www.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store/jsp/Product.do?BV_UseBVCookie=yes&sku=B11B178011<br>

I sometimes use one of it's predecessors, and it's quite good. Would use it more if I didn't have an outspoken preference for the darkroom.</p>

<p> </p>

[bob_sunley]

<p>For starters for high volume scanning, you want a decent scanner for 35mm, like a Fuji minilab scanner, it will do B&W and colour. Used price $5k I'd guess.<br>

How high rez for 4x5?<br>

"Daunting" isn't the word, impossible is much closer. At a wildly optimistic 5 min per frame for cleaning, scanning and cataloging, this is going to be full time work for a couple of decades. :(</p>

 

[Lou_Meluso]

<p>First you should determine the "A" list stuff. I'm sure that is a fraction of the whole. That should get the high end scan treatment.<br>

Check out the Imacon Flextight X5 scanner for all formats:<br>

<a href="http://www.adorama.com/IMAFX5.html">http://www.adorama.com/IMAFX5.html</a><br>

Also any scanner with a bulk loader would lighten the load for 35mm.<br>

Another idea for the "B" list is to find a Bessler Repronar and buy a Nikon 800e camera with a good macro lens and just shoot the film. Not as good as scanning but decent and quicker production rate.</p>

[larrydressler]

<p>My Suggestion is an EPSON V700. It will do 35mm-4x5. And it is not too shabby once you start to use it. It will do 2 4x5 at a time or 24 35mm at a time.</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>I can only recommend from somewhat bitter personal experience that you do them <em>once</em> at as high resolution as you can afford to do. Otherwise, you will inevitably end up having to do parts of them 2 or even 3 times to get decent images. Keep careful records of what you are scanning and, more importantly, NOT scanning. Presumably the collection is organized in some professional manner?</p>

<p>I think a 35mm and perhaps 6cm (2 1/2) quasi professional, dedicated film scanner is best for those formats. For 4x5, something like one of the newer, higher-level Canoscan flatbed film scanners will do.</p>

[john_shriver]

<p>The Imacon X5 is probably a good idea. <br>

Figure out how you will manage all that data, it's a LOT. You need a backup scheme that really works.<br>

But I can't for the world understand how you can recoup your financial investment speculatively scanning all that film. I'd suggest a good cataloguing job, with some sample scanning. Then scan to order. Of course, make sure you have good climate controlled storage for the negatives.<br>

You might want to investigate how Corbis, Mangum, etc., are dealing with digitization.</p>

[matthew_allen3]

<p>To be clear, I don't plan on scanning everything, there is just too much. Selective scanning is our intention. We are sitting on a mountain of incredible, old negatives from his commercial client base from the mid-40's to the 80's. I really appreciate everyone's input, and financially the Epson sounds like it might be a good start. </p>

[walter_degroot]

<p>The epson scanners are affordable. expecially if you purchase a refurb from the epson site..<br>

as others have said it is a daughting task.<br>

the nikon scanners are supposedly the best.<br>

but it is a big wonderment if they even still make them.<br>

so for now the epson from the website is the best you can do for now.</p>

<p>I do not envy you all that work<br>

this will take you to the epson site<br>

http://www.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store/BuyEpson/ccHome.jsp?BV_UseBVCookie=yes&oid=0</p>

[steve m smith]

<blockquote>

<p>I'm beginning the long process of scanning my grandfather's half million negatives.</p>

</blockquote>

<p><br /><br>

My only thought is why?</p>

[matthew_allen3]

<p>Steve, dont worry about it. </p>

[marc_bergman1]

<p>Matthew,</p>

<p>I would take a look at the Epson V 700 as others have suggested. It will do all the formats with good quality.</p>

<p>Other things to look at.</p>

<p>How is your computer system? You are going to be processing some big files. How about scanning software? You will also need image manipulation and filing software.</p>

<p>How much scanning have you done? I would suggest you practice, practice, practice. Get good enough so that you can make a scan at the quality that you need. As JDM said, you only want to scan once.</p>

<p>Good luck.</p>

[robert lee]

<blockquote>

<p>... financially the Epson sounds like it might be a good start.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Okay, so that boxes in the initial budget. I suggest breaking the project down into two phases.</p>

<p>First, pull together a good image cataloging and management system. Digitize all the film using the fastest method possible. Don't worry about quality or resolution; you just need enough for decent on monitor viewing. The goal is to have every images be in the catalog - searchable by subject matter, date, quality, emulsion type, amount of film deterioration, etc. </p>

<p>Take careful physical custody of each cataloged image. Make sure that in the implemented system you're actually able to find and retrieve every piece of film that has a corresponding electronic thumbnail.</p>

<p>Forget the V700 for this initial digitization pass. Instead, buy as many low-end film capable flatbeds as you can. Run these in parallel for much higher aggregate throughput. If you're handy, rig a multi-frame jig and use a DSLR for faster digitization. Be prepared to spend a few years doing this.</p>

<p>Second, shop the catalog around. A couple of paying corporate customers may well be enough to fund a Hasselblad Flextight X5. This machine <em>will</em> do the film justice. It's good enough for digital archiving work. However, forget about trying to do this for the entire half million exposure collection. The time needed to archive just a few thousand of the truly meaningful or exceptional will in itself be measured in decades.</p>

 

[Stock-Photos]

<p>Mathew, The Nikon Coolscan 5000 is one of the most efficient scanners for slides when the optional SF-210 slide feeder is attached. Although not perfect.</p>

<p>The scanner was discontinued by Nikon a while back but demand has <em>more</em> than doubled their value on the auction site.</p>

[larrydressler]

<p>Ya You would think a company would see the potential in building a line of scanners just because of that. </p>

[kk_yu]

<p>You could also consider a third-party scanning service like ScanCafe or something similar. It would save you the time and effort but could cost more if you are scanning a lot of images. There's also the thought of having the negatives out of your own hands which may be something you cannot accept.</p>

[larrydressler]

<p>Make it a family project. This is not something one person should try to take on alone. But when it comes to the 4x5 I do say get the V700 or at least a used 4990 both by Epson Referbs are just as good as they have the same warranty as new. You did not mention a budget but I went with the medium for you with my suggestions as I know what a project like this is. Also editing software I think you can get away with PS Elements or even GIMP Gimp is free Elements is under $100.00 US and much cheaper if you look online.<br>

We are not talking doing something 1/2 arsed so we need to set some limits on both ends but try to get upper end results for you.</p>

[james_smith55]

<p>Some people have come up with some great suggestions. Organization is key. Figure out the A list stuff and scan that using the best highest resolution equipment that is practical for your budget. It sound like you may have some real gems. You may want to consider buying a multi thousand dollar high end scanner USED. You can use it for your project and then resell it. <strong>I personally would buy a scanner for the 4x5 stuff and a separate scanner for the 35mm slides.</strong> A good high end 35mm scanner can save you a lot of grief in your workflow if you are scanning a bunch of slides/negatives. Secondly once you've put in that much time and effort you don't want to have the nagging feeling you could have done better.</p>

<p>The Nikon CoolScan 9000 is highly recommended for 35mm and medium format film. It can only be found used on places like ebay. There are some caveats about it's use on modern computers. Do your research before purchasing. <a href="http://www.photographyblog.com/news/plustek_opticfilm_120/">There is supposed to be a new dedicated film scanner coming to market</a> sometime soon. I don't know if it will live up to the hype. </p>

<p>I would love to see what you find in that collection. It would be awesome if you could do fine art or poster sales of some of those retro images, particularly the ones featuring things like Coca Cola. With the whole country going ga ga over "Mad Men" I'm sure there has to be a market for some of those images. Trouble is finding those images and connecting with that market in a profitable way.</p>

[danield]

<p>Have you considered using a digital camera? You can use a macro rig and mount the slides against a lit background or a flash and just take pictures of them. If you shoot tethered and use a film holder you can get through slides quite quickly. Of course you'll be limited by the resolution of your digital camera - probably not a match for 4x5 slides. However, speed is an advantage - with a diy setup I was able to do six 35mm frames per minute - and that includes loading, framing, shooting and saving as camera RAW files on the disc. Post-processing is always extra.<br>

Just Google around for DIY film scanner - lots of examples around the web, for instance<br>

http://www.digicaminfo.btinternet.co.uk/diyfilmcopying.htm</p>

 

[steve m smith]

<blockquote>

<p>Steve, dont worry about it.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I won't. I'm just glad it's not me doing it!</p>

<p>Assuming eight hours per day, seven days a week:<br />Five minutes per scan x 500,000 = 2,500,000 minutes or 41,666 hours, or 5,208 days or 14 years <br />Add any post processing time = no thanks!</p>

[steve m smith]

<blockquote>

<p>Selective scanning is our intention.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I missed that bit but yes, good idea!</p>

<p>If this was my collection I would just keep it in negative form and scan anything as and when I need it. Scanning for the sake of scanning is pointless as the negatives will outlast the scan files. It's the negatives which are the archive, not inferior scans of them.</p>

[mike_halliwell]

<p>+1 Robert Lee. </p>

<p>'IF' there is a visual catalogue of the material, ie 5 x 4 contact prints in indexed books etc then I'd leave that alone for now. If people can see well enough what they want, scan the chosen ones. How are these stores now, transparent sheets would be nice!</p>

<p>If there is no hard copy, a copystand rig (a 5 x 4 frame over a small lightbox) with a DSLR will manage 1 frame every 4 seconds with a human feeder assistant! I'd use tethering software and a foot switch.</p>

<p>How are the 35mm slides kept? In boxes, sheets, brown paper envelopes? If in transparent sheets, you can shoot a 36exp film in one go on a lightbox, if the slides have meaningful writing on the mounts, add some top light (flash) so you can see the images AND read the text. Something like the D800E will have enough res to show the single frame 'film' on a 30" monitor enough to see what's going on in each frame.</p>

[mattb1]

Skip the Epsons, they are ok for web and small prints, but IMO not up to the task of commercial work.

 

The DSLR idea is a decent idea, I have had better results with a great point and shoot than I did with an Epson. The

Nikon scanners are good, and you don't have a lot of touch up to do post scan.

 

But, I would suggest sending them out to a service. They will be able to scan faster and better than you. You will most

likely have enough to do with retouching and cataloging.

 

The learning curve is huge, and even harder with less expensive tools. Unless you really like the idea of spending a lot of

time scanning, You might be better off having an expert do the work.

[steve m smith]

<blockquote>

<p>The learning curve is huge</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Which brings up another problem: When you have scanned a thousand or so, you will be proficient at scanning and will by then have worked out the best method - leaving you wondering if you should start again!</p>

[james_smith55]

 

<blockquote>

<p>Skip the Epsons, they are ok for web and small prints, but IMO not up to the task of commercial work.</p>

</blockquote>

 

They might not be the pinnacle for 35mm slides but I don't see an economic alternative for medium format transparencies. That's why I suggested buying a Nikon Coolscan 9000 used and then selling it when he is done. I am not familiar with the DSLR thing. I have an Epson V500 and you have to add some sharpening while scanning to get acceptable detail.

 

<blockquote>

The Nikon scanners are good, and you don't have a lot of touch up to do post scan.

</blockquote>

 

Digital ICE is not recommended for Kodachromes. Sometimes it works fine but other times it leaves strange artifacts. I'm not sure how many of the OPs slides are Kodachromes.

 

 

 

<blockquote>

<p>But, I would suggest sending them out to a service. They will be able to scan faster and better than you. You will most likely have enough to do with retouching and cataloging.<br>

The learning curve is huge, and even harder with less expensive tools.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>This is the other problem. The OP is going to have to do a lot of learning and trial and error before they are going to be able to dive in and start doing mass scanning. You don't want to start this process without fully understanding your equipment. Selectively picking out negatives and sending them to a scanning service may be a better alternative. It won't be cheap though. But you have to figure out how much your time is worth. If you don't mind putting in the time it may well be worth it to buy something like a Coolscan 9000. Use it for the project then sell it. You limit your downside risk to a few hundred dollars if you are careful in your bidding. The problem with the that option is you better hope it doesn't break.</p>