Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Rangefinder Forum > Image Processing: Darkroom / Lightroom / Film > Scanners / Scanner Software

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Old 02-10-2016   #41
mcfingon
Western Australia
 
mcfingon is offline
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 731
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrMcCoy View Post
Haha, I love that contraption. Do you find the results to be good?

Also, what does "slide-popping" mean?
Yes, Doc (I hope I can call you Doc), the results are good. See the slide below shot on an M4-P/Summilux 50 at f1.4 in 1993. By slide-popping I mean when the heating from a hot light source causes the slide to move in its mount and go out of focus, sometimes with an audible pop as the film moves.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-10-2016   #42
edge100
Registered User
 
edge100 is offline
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 627
Quote:
Originally Posted by mani View Post

Maybe instead of simply mocking everything that comes along to help newer film enthusiasts that don't have decades of experience behind them, some of the 'experts' could share their knowledge about how to actually achieve the best results without spending thousands of dollars?
I've done that. Ad nauseum.

In order of importance, you need:

1. A solid copy stand
2. An evenly-illuminated light source
3. A solid set of film holders
4. A reasonably high MP DSLR or mirrorless camera that supports live view.
5. A good quality macro lens (AF is nice, but not essential)

I use a Kaiser RS-2, an Artograph Lightpad, Omega enlarger film carriers (35mm, 6x6, 6x7, and 4x5), a D800, and a Tokina 100/2.8. All of that was purchased for less than the cost of the FilmToaster (which doesn't include the camera or lens).

As I've repeated several times, the results are better than the 9000ED (res and DR), about the same as an X1 (res more, DR a bit less), and a bit worse than a Heidelberg drum scanner (both res and DR). The convenience and cost is orders of magnitude better than the X1 or drum scanner, and over the 9000ED, my setup has the advantage of being under warranty and the ability to be used as a camera.

I agree that this forum (and others) tends to be a bunch of complainers when anything new comes out. And with respect to the FilmToaster, it's a good idea. But it's at least $1000 too expensive (or should include a camera/lens for the current price).
__________________
Former street photographer
The Definitive Guide to Scanning Film with a Digital Camera
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-10-2016   #43
Ronald M
Registered User
 
Ronald M is offline
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,109
Back in the day we would turn the enlarger head over and use a copy stand.

Contrast can be controlled by leaving unmasked space around the slide. I could copy Kodachrome to Kodachrome and have it look decent.

About a year ago, I suspended a cardboard with a hole for slide , used a focus lamp and electronic flash plus some old color printing filters. It was a proof of concept for a neighbor to make copies of his childrens childhood slides.

This thing looks a lot like Heiland slide copier without the camera track, bellows, and camera. That worked on flash.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-28-2017   #44
roscoetuff
Registered User
 
roscoetuff is offline
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Washington DC
Age: 60
Posts: 272
FWIW, I called the folks to find out about this. The first thing is that the price of $2400 (in the thread title) is about double the actual price. The second is that it is aimed primarily at archivists, and it is selling pretty well (acording to the builder/designer). Yes, you can put together a copy stand and bellows, the designer has done that and thought about that in one of his prototypes, but anyone looking at prices for new units (Novoflex) will see they run a pretty penny. And the Espon 850 scanner is just a tad under the price of this unit. Deisgner claims that if you use your DSLR, you'll have better scans than the Epson, and increasing evidence suggests he's right that DSLR scans are better. Nikon Coolscans are very good as the designer mentions, but he's designed this for high volume with equal or better technology. Price remains an obstacle, but if this is the way you want to do it, the repeatability of having a foolproof standardized set-up will appeal to some. Is it worth the money to you is the full question... and I'd expect that to most here, no. We're not the target audience... which is libraries, schools, magazines and the like with extensive film libraries of 1 million or more photographs where speed is a real requirement, and that's speed in terms of 36 "scans" in under 6 minutes. Given the still higher costs of a Nikon scanner and its relative age vs. this unit, and given the cost of bellows-based copy stands - new, you're looking at a macro copy stand. Add in the cost of a macro lens if you don't have one, and THEN you might get to the $2,400 price - or not.

So that's what I found out and thought some might be curious to know more than they did when the first comments were posted here over a year ago.
__________________
"Go out looking for one thing, and that's all you'll ever find." Robert J. Flaherty, Cinematographer
"If a day goes by without my doing something related to photography, it's as though I've neglected something essential to my existence, as though I had forgotten to wake up." Richard Avedon, Photographer
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-28-2017   #45
mani
Registered User
 
mani is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 761
Thanks for highlighting this project again - I'd forgotten about it. It seems like the cost for a standard, 'consumer' setup is around $999 which, though less than the original $2400 featured in the thread, is still a lot of money for a metal box and a light-source and film-holder.

I still see a place for this sort of equipment, but I wish it was both cheaper and more flexible to setup: looking at the FAQ, it seems the user still has to find extension tubes and lenses with the correct thread (or step-up filters).

Maybe the whole thing would be more convincing if the website didn't spend so much space defending the price, instead of explaining the equipment itself.

Still think there's a Kickstarter opportunity for people building something similar, with more options but less over-specced and over-priced for the general consumer market.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-29-2017   #46
frank-grumman
Registered User
 
frank-grumman is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: SoCal/PA
Posts: 224
A thread illustrating the commentary cued by this device:

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/foru...d.php?t=161295

  Reply With Quote

Old 05-29-2017   #47
Ko.Fe.
Me. Write ESL. Ko.
 
Ko.Fe.'s Avatar
 
Ko.Fe. is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MiltON.ONtario
Age: 50
Posts: 4,640
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanmich View Post
Not even talking about the price.
How is it better than, say, an epson V800?
It isn't, if you like do it quick and looking at the image, not pixels, but apparently loads of people like to do it slow and awkward.

It really works for Minox negatives. I think because Minox photography and film developing is also wierd and awkward. Perfect match.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-29-2017   #48
mani
Registered User
 
mani is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 761
Quote:
Originally Posted by frank-grumman View Post
A thread illustrating the commentary cued by this device:

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/foru...d.php?t=161295

Haha yeah thanks Frank for that entertaining exchange of views on the Filmtoaster - that discussion really did escalate rather quickly.

Setting aside that this piece of equipment is definitely over-priced even at $999, one thing that some of the more experienced members on the forum might tend to forget is that newcomers to film won't know how to get hold of film-holders for 35mm and 120 film; they might not know which copy-stands work for this sort of task, nor how much they should reasonably pay; they don't necessarily know how to mount the camera and lens so it's guaranteed to be parallel to the film, nor what distance and magnification is needed; they might have trouble finding the right light-source, and how to position it relative to the negative or slide; and so on...

Searching on the forum will definitely help to get an overview of a myriad of different options, but I'd certainly appreciate an off-the-shelf, and quality solution to the problem, if I ever decide to go this route instead of scanning.

The Filmtoaster looks like an overpriced option, but putting together all the pieces that are needed from scratch can also be an expensive process - especially for those of us without bits and pieces of old enlargers and film-holders lying around at home.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-30-2017   #49
roscoetuff
Registered User
 
roscoetuff is offline
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Washington DC
Age: 60
Posts: 272
Yeah. The builder makes no bones about the price being higher in production than he'd like if he were going into large scale production. But again, relative to Epson V850, it ain't all that bad - especially if you already have a digital camera of 24MP or better, and view it as a very rigid stand that makes repeating your set-up easy. The last qualifier is important. And the speed thing is more important to the design process than you think. Doing 36 exposures off a roll is one thing. Trying to digitize an entire film library another, and that's been the real market.

I'm not surprised no one here has gone this route. If you already have a scanner, if you already have your negs scanned, if you already.... then this is redundant and certainly unknown. Proven remains a good verifier, and side-by-side comparisons are something I haven't seen for the reason (I'm guessing) that the variable of cameras and lenses used would be an issue.

The other aspect is that I'm surprised as I look around, the numbers of folks who are using Hasseblad scanners, drum scanners, and especially the prices for Coolscan Nikons that are 10 plus years out of production surprise me. Costs aren't the only are even necessarily the material issue here. And Film Toaster is perhaps an oddball machine for an oddball hybrid market. Not for everyone... definitely. But like I posted, a good bellows/slide copy piece of equipment on ebay can run $300 to $500, and that ain't cheap either. Fellow claims he's sold it mostly to libraries and to some film labs, too. I'm not pushing this by any means, just thought it tends to be unfairly misunderstood and some things merit a closer look. Heck, that's how I got back into film, so why not?

So the bottom line question is will someone make a mid-market dedicated film scanner that fills the bill for new hardware? Most seem to suggest my Plustek is pretty easy to surpass. Okay. And I can't do MF either. Got that. Other options? That will depend on whether or not the hybrid film to digital market is growing from it's pretty doggone small level (my guess). If not, then high prices aren't going to be a surprise any more than rising prices of film and antique cameras will be as we move forward. Maybe Film Toaster is simply a prototype for what will come in a more reasonable price point? Dunno.
__________________
"Go out looking for one thing, and that's all you'll ever find." Robert J. Flaherty, Cinematographer
"If a day goes by without my doing something related to photography, it's as though I've neglected something essential to my existence, as though I had forgotten to wake up." Richard Avedon, Photographer
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-30-2017   #50
Ko.Fe.
Me. Write ESL. Ko.
 
Ko.Fe.'s Avatar
 
Ko.Fe. is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MiltON.ONtario
Age: 50
Posts: 4,640
Quote:
Originally Posted by roscoetuff View Post
....
The other aspect is that I'm surprised as I look around, the numbers of folks who are using Hasseblad scanners, drum scanners, and especially the prices for Coolscan Nikons that are 10 plus years out of production surprise me. ..
I willing to help you on this one. Key words are Digital ICE and multi-exposure.
  Reply With Quote

KO FE: Thanks again.
Old 05-30-2017   #51
roscoetuff
Registered User
 
roscoetuff is offline
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Washington DC
Age: 60
Posts: 272
KO FE: Thanks again.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ko.Fe. View Post
I willing to help you on this one. Key words are Digital ICE and multi-exposure.
Just googled them and it looks like it may be worth a shot to see what I can pull out using this on the few images that are worth it off a roll. Plustek 8200i is decent for 35mm, but not great. Be curious whether this will make the step ahead. Worth a try. Thanks!

There's a part of me that thinks there's something nice in a flatbed's ability to generate a "proof sheet" that the dedicated-only approach doesn't have. My old flatbed is a V300 series... waaaaay old. But might be "good enough" for that purpose.

End of the day? If I ever give MF a whirl, the step-up in ancillary infrastructure seems a tad daunting. MF cameras are also a tad clunky in size, but wow... the images sure are great.
__________________
"Go out looking for one thing, and that's all you'll ever find." Robert J. Flaherty, Cinematographer
"If a day goes by without my doing something related to photography, it's as though I've neglected something essential to my existence, as though I had forgotten to wake up." Richard Avedon, Photographer
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-30-2017   #52
roscoetuff
Registered User
 
roscoetuff is offline
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Washington DC
Age: 60
Posts: 272
Chirs Crawford seems to have particular disdain for the Toaster approach and maybe as well DSLR scanning? The good news is that through his posts I think I've seen the first recommendation (is it?) of the Plustek 120. Curious as well about the Braun 120... as I think they were both about the same price.

Real world? There is no "quick". Assuming you can work the bugs out of a repeatable at-the-ready piece of hardware either home built, or pruchased, you still have to take the DSLR scans and convert them. You can use Photoshop or similar, but I've read Mar Segal's approach using Silverfast's HDR 8 software for the negative conversion before going into post-processing. Makes sense to me. What I didn't like about DSLR scans were the reversal of all (most?) of the controls for fixing images in Capture One (and I'd assume the same in Photoshop/Lightroom). Kind of felt like I was training myself into doing things "wrong". So for me, that'd be two software runs instead of one, but if the speed can be pumped, maybe it gets the equivalent "proof sheet" stage quickly enough to justify. I may revisit this down the pipe.
__________________
"Go out looking for one thing, and that's all you'll ever find." Robert J. Flaherty, Cinematographer
"If a day goes by without my doing something related to photography, it's as though I've neglected something essential to my existence, as though I had forgotten to wake up." Richard Avedon, Photographer
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-30-2017   #53
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 4,036
Quote:
Originally Posted by edge100 View Post
I've been 'scanning' with a D800 and a Tokina 100/2.8 macro (and a Kaiser RS-2 copy stand) for about 2 years.

The quality is FAR better than a V800, especially given the ability to stitch from 6 or more images of a 6x7 or 4x5 negative.

I've compared with a 9000ED, an X1, and a Heidelberg drum scanner. The DR and resolution are better than the 9000ED. The X1 is lower res (on MF), but a bit better DR. The Heidelberg is (as expected) better in all respects.

But for less than the cost of this 'toaster', I'm producing the best scans I've ever made, in less time, and for far less money than I would otherwise have to pay.

DSLR/mirrorless scanning is the real deal.
Could not agree more. I'm going to post your link to the DSLR scanning thread.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-30-2017   #54
roscoetuff
Registered User
 
roscoetuff is offline
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Washington DC
Age: 60
Posts: 272
Huss and Edge100: I'm tending to agree. Fairly a Kaiser RS-2 ain't $1,000, but you can find copy stands in that range if you want. Used looks to run $350 to $600 depending on the source, new/used, etc. And if the equipment ain't on hand, it has a price. My guess is the mark-up is 3X ($30 for Kaiser's same neg holder vs. $99). Standard retail. More power to him if he can get it. But for his intended institutional audience, this is chump change.

I think more material matter is the time involved. Set-up, use and take down ain't chump change - especially if you do it all the time. Neither is post process time. If you can dedicate the space, the camera and all the other hardware permanently, then whether you roll your own or buy this, or a dedicated scanner, the set-up time problem goes away. I think this is the only potential defect with DSLR scanning. Otherwise, I'd agree that the quality and time equation is much better with DSLR's if you can work it.

These days my DSLR is getting less and less use, so some sort of set-up might be a good way to make sure it doesn't atrophy. Question is how to make the set-up both quick to release and quick to align and use. My earlier roll-my-own effort didn't lick that problem, thus an enlarger/copy stand + light source + negative holder alignment + camera presented a lot moving variables, and I wasn't satisfied. Plustek did allow me to eliminate that and get some decent output. Decent isn't amazing. But if I go further in this direction, then I'd be inclined to want some sort of jig you can really use to minimize the fussing with these variables. I think that's his strong point. I'm not a fan of the price even at the actual price of $1200. But then again, I'm not a fan of a lot of photography gear prices.
__________________
"Go out looking for one thing, and that's all you'll ever find." Robert J. Flaherty, Cinematographer
"If a day goes by without my doing something related to photography, it's as though I've neglected something essential to my existence, as though I had forgotten to wake up." Richard Avedon, Photographer

Last edited by roscoetuff : 05-30-2017 at 15:35. Reason: clarity
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-30-2017   #55
frank-grumman
Registered User
 
frank-grumman is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: SoCal/PA
Posts: 224
I really appreciate the commentary you all are providing, especially for me since I'm so on the fence about DSLR on the one hand, scanning on the other. I don't hold any fond notions of my being a photographer of any caliber at all, though I do enjoy the process of shooting film for whatever reason. I have seven rolls on my desktop at this point from my newly acquired Nikon F6 and a 28-300VR that my son has let me use and a 135/2 Zeiss Milvus I rented from LensRentals. My DSLR is an Olympus E-M1.1. I have no macro lens, although BH and others have the 60macro for $400. When I add that price to the stand or tripod, add the light table, camera connector to the stand/tripod, level ruler, and card stock, and other stuff I don't know I need, etc., I'm right at the cost of a V850 +/- So, at this point, since I just enjoy the process of taking film but don't enjoy the cost associated with having my local lab produce 4mb files on a CD, I'm gonna give the Plustek a whirl I think. thanks for all your constructive input
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-30-2017   #56
michaelwj
----------------
 
michaelwj's Avatar
 
michaelwj is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Brisbane AUS
Posts: 1,507
Quote:
Originally Posted by frank-grumman View Post
I'm gonna give the Plustek a whirl I think. thanks for all your constructive input
So you're going to do what Chris said?
He knows a lot about scanning, and is well worth listening to. But hey, you make your own choices I suppose.
__________________
Cheers,
Michael
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-30-2017   #57
ptpdprinter
Registered User
 
ptpdprinter is offline
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 263
The current price is $1299, or $1699 with film holders. Since the film holders are integral to the functioning of the unit, I'm not sure why they are not included in the base price. Marketing I suppose.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-30-2017   #58
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 4,036
Quote:
Originally Posted by frank-grumman View Post
I really appreciate the commentary you all are providing, especially for me since I'm so on the fence about DSLR on the one hand, scanning on the other. I don't hold any fond notions of my being a photographer of any caliber at all, though I do enjoy the process of shooting film for whatever reason. I have seven rolls on my desktop at this point from my newly acquired Nikon F6 and a 28-300VR that my son has let me use and a 135/2 Zeiss Milvus I rented from LensRentals. My DSLR is an Olympus E-M1.1. I have no macro lens, although BH and others have the 60macro for $400. When I add that price to the stand or tripod, add the light table, camera connector to the stand/tripod, level ruler, and card stock, and other stuff I don't know I need, etc., I'm right at the cost of a V850 +/- So, at this point, since I just enjoy the process of taking film but don't enjoy the cost associated with having my local lab produce 4mb files on a CD, I'm gonna give the Plustek a whirl I think. thanks for all your constructive input
I bought the copy stand new off ebay for $170-ish (all the info is on my thread). I bought my Nikon macro lens used for $200-ish. There is one on fredmiranda for about that price. Most probably others too..
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/top...=60mm#14044030

I bought my lightpad used off ebay for $20. New it would be $90.
etc etc

Set up of the apparatus is maybe, maybe 5 minutes for 120 film. Take out copy stand. Take out light pad. Attach lens to camera. Attach camera to copy stand. Put film in film holder. That's it.
With 35mm film it is take out camera. Attach lens. Attach slide copier to lens. Insert film into film holder and put into slide copier. Point at light source. Take photo. So maybe 2 minutes to set up.

Anyway you have options.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-30-2017   #59
mani
Registered User
 
mani is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 761
Quote:
Originally Posted by ptpdprinter View Post
The current price is $1299, or $1699 with film holders. Since the film holders are integral to the functioning of the unit, I'm not sure why they are not included in the base price. Marketing I suppose.
Just for the record - because this thread is already full of misinformation - the price for the basic unit plus ONE film holder (either 120 or 35mm) is $999. So for a person just doing 35mm you can buy the setup you need for $999.

I'm not defending that price - which I still think is too much - but there's no need to make stuff up just to attack it.
http://www.filmtoaster.photography/filmtoaster-personal
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-31-2017   #60
ptpdprinter
Registered User
 
ptpdprinter is offline
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 263
[duplicate]
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-31-2017   #61
ptpdprinter
Registered User
 
ptpdprinter is offline
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 263
The website explicitly states that the Film Toaster is "$1299 (without holders)". It must be attacking itself.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-31-2017   #62
Peter Jennings
Registered User
 
Peter Jennings's Avatar
 
Peter Jennings is offline
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Seoul
Posts: 294
The link above refers to the Film Toaster Personal (which I guess is the economy version) that sells for $999.
__________________
Peter
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-31-2017   #63
roscoetuff
Registered User
 
roscoetuff is offline
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Washington DC
Age: 60
Posts: 272
Quote:
Originally Posted by ptpdprinter View Post
I just took the prices off of the website, where they explicitly say the $1299 price is "without holders". Not sure why quoting prices off their website is an attack.
I'd agree. AND the guy is a photographer. You'd think folks would cut him some slack... Give him credit for building a different option? Nope. Price too high? Perhaps. I'd call it "prototype pricing"... probably not much over the cost of custom machining, painting, etc. with something left over. Anyone who's done this will typically order a couple of hundred for the warehouse, but all the profit tends to lie in selling the last 30 or so units.

More to the point is whether the hardware actually works the way it is intended and is easier to get 1st class results or not. My bet is his system out-of-the-box delivers more repeatable results because your set-up is locked and loaded. Something to be said for that. Does it justify the price? Mileage may vary, but I think it depends on how you define what you want... of which the neg scan itself may not be the only thing.

Again, compared to those who've spent $16,000 to $25,000 on a Hasselblad Flextight scanner - and I've read blogs by talented photographer who despite the expectations of financial hardship, apparently have the scratch to do so and they assume they're not the only ones out there... so there's a world out there where this is dirt cheap rather than ridiculously priced. And even if you allow the Hasselblad's resale is much more certain than a one-of-a-kind piece of hardware like this, a Flex just doesn't cross the plane of possibility in my mind. Back in the day, from what I've read, commercial scanners were 10 times even the Hasselblad's price and required a complete professional staff... all since sadly let go as magazines began demanding digital originals.

It's one thing to say (or acknowledge) Film Toaster's price is high. That's easy. But it's another to suggest that there is more value in a 10-year plus piece of equipment that reputedly doesn't even run unless you have Windows XP - a system 10 years plus out of date itself, and most likely something you'd have to run in a virtual environment. (If that's not true, please speak up... 'cause that might change the calculus) All of that is less and less credible to me... especially with DSLR scanning, and DSLR's scan quality at speed. My Plustek at least offers Windows 10, and while a medium quality scan isn't quick, it is working "for now" and what I have, and a bird in hand...

Final thought: sometimes, ideas like the Film Toaster suffer for other reasons. Some deserved, some not. But like the prototype for the upcoming Lab Box Kickstarter... I don't get the impression that the original of the Lab Box from the 1950's or 1960's was much of a hit... but yet some found value there, it developed a cult following and now today, it's re-invention has been something of a prospective "sensation". Possible the same may hold here. And Cecil (Film Toaster man) ain't a youngster but probably 70+.

Just sayin': My mind is open... even if my wallet is squeakin' at the moment.
__________________
"Go out looking for one thing, and that's all you'll ever find." Robert J. Flaherty, Cinematographer
"If a day goes by without my doing something related to photography, it's as though I've neglected something essential to my existence, as though I had forgotten to wake up." Richard Avedon, Photographer
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-31-2017   #64
mani
Registered User
 
mani is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 761
Quote:
Originally Posted by ptpdprinter View Post
The website explicitly states that the Film Toaster is "$1299 (without holders)". It must be attacking itself.
As Peter points out, there are different versions of the FilmToaster - including a commercial or 'personal' model that includes a film holder and costs $999.
The main target audience (as others have pointed out) are institutions and companies with very large numbers of slides and negatives that need to be digitized, and therefore most of the information on the website is targeting them. But the $999 version is prominently linked from the first page - so there's no point pretending it costs more than this.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-04-2017   #65
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
 
Chriscrawfordphoto's Avatar
 
Chriscrawfordphoto is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana
Age: 41
Posts: 7,757
Quote:
Originally Posted by roscoetuff View Post
Chirs Crawford seems to have particular disdain for the Toaster approach and maybe as well DSLR scanning?

I have nothing against Dslr scanning. It works well, as the results many RFF members have show me demonstrates. I don't do it because I already own a Nikon LS-8000ED film scanner, and to do SLR scanning I would need to go buy some things I don't have (a macro lens, copy stand, and good light box). The Nikon produces incredible scans, so no reason to spend money on something I don't need.

I do object to the Film Toaster. It is emblematic of the kind of attitude that so many manufacturers of photo gear have toward their customers. Namely, that we're all brain-dead walking plies of money who will pay anything, no matter how outrageous. The Film Toaster is not worth the money charged for it. Stop letting these businesses prey on us. Its like paying ransom to terrorists; it just emboldens them to go bigger the next time.
__________________
Christopher Crawford
Fine Art Photography
Fort Wayne, Indiana

Back home again in Indiana

http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com

My Technical Info pages: Film Developing times, scanning, printing, editing.

Buy My Prints in RFF Classifieds

Support My Work on Patreon
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-04-2017   #66
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 43
Posts: 18,259
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dante_Stella View Post
"This is path-breaking."
"You don't understand our super special product."
"You feel threatened by it."
"You're insecure about change."
"This is disruptive."

So says every 25-year-old man-child marketer who wants to play on other people's insecurities (or is too unaware of the world to realize his claims aren't in the least true).

The beauty of being older is that your prefrontal cortex is fully formed, and you know that shiny unicorns don't exist.

Dante
I'm 43 and old enough to know that everyone who is 25 is not an idiot. I'm not into this product, but the whole generalization of hipsters is tiresome.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-04-2017   #67
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
 
Chriscrawfordphoto's Avatar
 
Chriscrawfordphoto is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana
Age: 41
Posts: 7,757
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
I'm 43 and old enough to know that everyone who is 25 is not an idiot. I'm not into this product, but the whole generalization of hipsters is tiresome.

No, not all 25 yr olds are idiots, but hipsters are. I can't imagine living a life characterized by the mindless cookie-cutter conformity that I see in these overindulged semi-educated fools with no real knowledge or experience of the real world.

Hopefully, its a passing phenomenon. I saw no hipsters in my years as a high school teacher, so I have hope in the younger generation. Many of my kids, including the inner-city kids that no one has any hope for, were very intelligent.
__________________
Christopher Crawford
Fine Art Photography
Fort Wayne, Indiana

Back home again in Indiana

http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com

My Technical Info pages: Film Developing times, scanning, printing, editing.

Buy My Prints in RFF Classifieds

Support My Work on Patreon
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-04-2017   #68
f16sunshine
Moderator
 
f16sunshine's Avatar
 
f16sunshine is online now
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Seattle
Age: 49
Posts: 5,655
So much negativity.
....Sheesh.
__________________
Andy
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-04-2017   #69
p.giannakis
Registered User
 
p.giannakis's Avatar
 
p.giannakis is offline
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Stafford - UK
Posts: 1,468
I prefer my 60 used Canoscan 8600F and with the rest money i can buy a second hand car....
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-05-2017   #70
mani
Registered User
 
mani is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 761
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chriscrawfordphoto View Post
I do object to the Film Toaster. It is emblematic of the kind of attitude that so many manufacturers of photo gear have toward their customers. Namely, that we're all brain-dead walking piles of money who will pay anything, no matter how outrageous. The Film Toaster is not worth the money charged for it. Stop letting these businesses prey on us. Its like paying ransom to terrorists; it just emboldens them to go bigger the next time.
But this doesn't address the problem: which is that there's a real need that isn't being fulfilled by the manufacturers right now.

If I had the time and expertise then I'd try to achieve some constructive solution: possibly a Kickstarter for a plastic-injection version of this sort of thing. It's hardly an original idea, and there are plenty of different versions for 'lightweight' scanning with cellphones and so on, so 'scanning' with a DSLR is hardly patented.

But while I agree that the FilmToaster is very high-priced, as I've said before it's easier for a newbie than gathering together all the other bits and pieces that need a degree of expertise to locate, buy and put together. And if you're starting from scratch, then the final price difference might not even be so great (not everyone is that good at finding quality secondhand copy stands, and so on).
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-05-2017   #71
roscoetuff
Registered User
 
roscoetuff is offline
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Washington DC
Age: 60
Posts: 272
Cecil Williams - Mr. Film Toaster btw, suggests the competeing product is the volume scanner here: https://dtdch.com/film/ and with a short demo here: http://https://video.search.yahoo.co...d&action=click

I think we are talking about completely different markets in terms of what Wiliams is offering. Novoflex copy stands parts ain't cheap new either. Nor some of their competing stands. Volume users are looking for new... rather than cobbling stuff together off ebay. That's the institutional market. And compared to the commercial scanners of yore, I'd imagine even the DT unit which assumes a Phase One MF camera would be cheap and involve less technical talent to run the thing.

From what I've seen FT's sold about 60-plus units. Likely small institutions. Larger would either have the budget to farm it out or to pursue the DT type unit they might also use for books. DSLR speed has a lot to offer. Even artist rates of $120 an hour would recapture the cost in no time. Could the whole have been made out of high impact plastic? Sure. Probably for a 10th the cost but you'd have to have a lot more volume. Says the unit is machined and assembled in Nova Scotia. Transport is going to run something. I'd imagine that at the end of the day, he's not making a lot on these things. Again, 10 units of profit on a 100 unit production run... and all at the back end.

Price relative to used copy stands is high. Ditto for stuff you pull together yourself. Comparing that to a commercial product is unrealistic. Marketing issue in my view is that the full cost includes your DSLR, a light source, etc. so even at the price, it depends on stuff you already own... and I think the folks who are going to see the logic are already well down the road of having most of the pieces themselves. Make or Buy leaves the "Buy" option less compelling. For example, here is Kaiser's "Copylizer eVision" product, and it goes a long way toward making Film Toaster's insane price look pretty rational: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...pact_Copy.html

FWIW, part of what drew me back to film was to get out of the electronic upgrade cycle the camera companies seem to be running mostly to their benefit. That may be over as we plateau, but I thought it a real turn off. That said, photography is a gear intensive avocation, and from what I can see, the only thing Mr. Williams has done here is try to offer what seems increasingly reasonable price relative to similar products packaging the same solution. It's not even that out of line relative some of the prices of higher end tripods out there. Can you build your own tripod? Sure. Can you get by with something less than high end graphite?
Sure. And FT is a dedicated use - read small market, so there's that and small market's usuall cost more. I do think it's a tad unfair to make this guy out as if he's the villain or emblematic of the villainy of photographic companies out there. Really? Compared to Phase One? He's the bad guy? He's a photographer in his 80's and offering a solution of the sort he worked out for himself, and it's not a bad one from some of the video reviews. If it didn't work, that'd be one thing. No one has said that.
__________________
"Go out looking for one thing, and that's all you'll ever find." Robert J. Flaherty, Cinematographer
"If a day goes by without my doing something related to photography, it's as though I've neglected something essential to my existence, as though I had forgotten to wake up." Richard Avedon, Photographer
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:57.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.