Scan at home or use service?

[steve_singleton2]

<p>With a large collection of family color slides, and mostly b&w negatives of many formats, I'm wondering whether it makes more sense to buy a film scanner and invest the time in learning how to use it, or to just to pay a service. If I were to buy a scanner, I'd probably try to hope to buy one with an automated slide feeder, then try to resell afterward without taking too much of a loss on the equipment. I don't intend to continue shooting and digitizing film, so I don't want to invest too much time or money in the process of preserving family memories. Can anyone who has been down this road advise me on a strategy?</p>

[john_h.1]

<p>Its a huge pain to scan large amounts of negatives and slides. Extremely time consuming and taking away time form the same family whose memories are intended to be preserved.</p>

[SCL]

<p>Doing it yourself is very time consuming, using a good service is expensive. No easy solution (I've been scanning old family photos and slides off and on for 4 years - it is easy to burn out, hard to return to the task).</p>

[steve m smith]

<p>I agree with John. Just scan them as and when you need them rather than waste your life away making sub-standard scans of negatives and slides which will still be in good condition long after the files are corrupt or un-readable.</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>I did it, twice (<a href="/casual-conversations-forum/00arR1">link</a>), which brings up my advice. If you do it yourself, do it <strong>right,</strong> from the beginning. My images were mostly Kodachrome slides, and were mostly not "family" images.</p>

<p>If you do it at all, Repeat:<br>

Scan High resolution, and scan once.</p>

<p>If you disperse your scans widely in digital form to family and persons involved, they may well still be accessible when your slides and negatives are faded and covered with fungal growth, if they aren't already.</p>

[MichaelChang]

<p>My father scanned boxes of negatives and prints about 10 years ago. Took him months but he was retired and enjoyed the process. </p>

<p>These days, I've seen pricing of around 20-30 cents per high resolution scan in quantities over 500, so the value judgement really comes down to how much you value your time or are concerned over the control of results, and whether the decision works out to be in your favor. </p>

[walter_degroot]

<p>scanning yourself can be a real time eater.<br>

manufacturer's discontimued most dedicated scannersa about 5 years befor photographers decided they needed them<br>

Possibly that firured there was little demand and decided to stop making them.<br>

If your would like to archive negatives and slides.,<br>

get a epson perfection flatbed.<br>

Only "acceptible" not high res scans.<br>

But negatives will last a long time and so will kodachrome if carefully stored.<br>

this can eb considered a backup copy. and other cd/dvd's can be kept elwhere as a safety precaution.<br>

but these digital copies may not last as long as the original film.<br>

a hard drive backup<br>

IF THE PERSON WHO FINDS THE HARD DRIVE KNOIWS THEY ARE FANILY<br>

MEMORIES. Otherwise don't bother.,</p>

<p>If you do "send out" do it in smaller groups not all at once.</p>

[wgpinc]

<p>Send them out to www.digmypics.com. The will do a great job and they are 1. not too expensive and 2. based in Arizona. My brother had a large number of color and black and white 35mm negs and slides done there with excellent results. Another alternative is scancafe. They do a good job but send them to India. I scan 35mm slides with a KM Dimage 5400 scanner but it is time consuming and there is a learning curve. Any new slides I occasionally shoot go in for developing and scanning at the same time. Anything else I want scanned will go to digmypics. Good luck. </p>

[AlanKlein]

<p>Why do you want to scan all those slides? Do you think anyone is really going to look at all of them down the road? Why not get a light table and go through them by hand and pick the ones that are the best and are not just duplicates one from the other. Then you'll have a reasonable amount to scan. But then what do you intend to do with the scanned photos? Make a slide show? Print them? or what?</p>

<p>You really ought to have an end game so you don't waste time and energy.</p>

[mattb1]

Scanning not only takes a lot of time, but there is a significant amout of skill involved. It will take a lot of practice to be

good at it.

 

IMO, send them out. The B&W will take much longer and will require a lot of manual touch up. You will have more than

enough work just getting everyone's name, date and location right.

[Gup]

<p>Well, I guess you got the advice you were asking for. It is true what everyone said about it taking time. It's also true there is a learning curve. My advice is to cull out the shots you are most interested in on a light table, as Alan said, and scan those first. Work your way through them a few at a time and eventually you will have digitized your most valued work and can decide then whether it's worth doing all the rest or not. I bought a used Nikon LS9000 from a fellow P.netter and have been doing mine. It is very rewarding to breathe new life into 20 or 30 year old negs, and print the odd one for the wall. I prefer to do them myself for the same reason I prefer to do my own printing, control.</p>

[john_h.1]

<p>digmypics, scancafe and the like are adequate if you must have mass scanning done and simply cannot afford it otherwise. I recommend, however, our own Jim Harrington with his hands on expertise, personal communication and affordable pricing make an ideal mix for getting quality slide scans. http://www.saugus.net/Photos/scanning.shtml I also have had great success with Digifi for expert, attentive and affordable negative scanning. http://www.dijifi.com/</p>

<p>I tend to agree with those also suggesting picking the better of the images rather than an all out digitizing of everything. You can still get a real lot of images whether farming out or doing in house. Its still a tedious effort doing it at home even when less is done but its better. It also makes farming out more affordable. Plus, less is often more. 200 or so of the best or most historic images will have more impact and value then 10,000 that no one has the time to sift through.</p>

[steve_singleton2]

<p>Thanks to all who responded and in particular for the suggestions about which scanning services/individuals people have had good luck with. Given the expense of a quality scanner, and my likely inability to devote myself to doing the scanning start to finish in one go, I'm leaning toward farming the task out. I do have a lightbox and loupe for editing and an Epson flatbed scanner, but that doesn't work well for the 35mm slides/negs.</p>

[sfcole]

<p>Digmypics is pretty good, although check their shipping charges. In the past, they charged way too much, probably to make up for the low scanning prices. They may have changed their policy, though.<br>

I refuse to send my negs to India. <br>

People who outsource scanning shouldn't complain when their job goes to India too.</p>

[scottelly]

<p>I'd get a scanner. They're cheap and fast, and you can do it yourself, when you decide to spend five or ten minutes on a particular set. No need to package up negatives and mail them out. No extra cost for shipping. No worries about losing your film. You can do it whenever you want.</p>

<p>You will need a clean area. That just takes a few minutes and some wet rags. You should change your air conditioner filter before starting too. If you live in a very dusty environment, you may want to tape up cracks under and around doors and windows with some duct tape and use an extra air filter in the room you'll be working in. As you probably know, dust is your enemy, when dealing with film. Here is a filter you could use:</p>

<p>http://www.amazon.com/Honeywell-Pure-Round-Purifier-50150-N/dp/B00008OOX2/ref=pd_sim_hg_7</p>

<p>Best of all, you will save more than the cost of the scanner in the process of scanning just a few dozen slides/negatives. That can be done in less than an hour with the cheaper, faster scanners. I've found that good quality scanning services charge more than a dollar per scan. That translates to more than the cost of a cheap scanner for just three 36 exposure rolls of film. If you are scanning dozens of rolls (hundreds of photos), then you could get a more expensive scanner for around $300 or $400 and it would cost you less than a dollar per photo. Then you have a scanner you can lend to friends and use in the future, or you can just sell it on Craigslist for $100 or maybe even $200.</p>

<p>Here's a fast, cheap scanner that works o.k. for posting photos on Facebook or printing at 4x6 or 5x7.</p>

<p>http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/895264-REG/Wolverine_f2d20_20MP_35mm_Film_To.html</p>

<p>For better results you can get a more expensive unit, but it will be more time consuming to make your scans. I suggest something like this one, if you are going to print 8x10 or larger:</p>

<p>http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/894381-REG/Plustek_783064365321_OpticFilm_8100_Film_Scanner.html</p>

<p>Here is a very expensive unit (just for comparison):</p>

<p>http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/463800-REG/Hasselblad_70380301_Flextight_X5_Scanner.html</p>

[keith_osbon]

<p>Use Memory Fortress ... 10 cents a scan for a big order, average price is about 13 cents. Turnaround time is about a week.</p>