Old 11-16-2015   #41
traveler_101
American abroad
 
traveler_101 is offline
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Oslo, Norway
Posts: 1,080
Quote:
Originally Posted by robert blu View Post
Being now more involved in instant photography I'm not shooting much conventional film lately, sometimes I shoot Cinestill 50 and send them to this lab for developing and scanning.

To my eye quality is good enough and the price convenient (it would be different if shooting a lot as I did times ago).

robert

m7, cinestill 50

Thanks for posting. The company in Spain that does the developing say they believe in "film's new age," but some times I become dispirited and fear that most of us are are ageing - and perhaps shooting less and less film as time goes by.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-16-2015   #42
David Hughes
David Hughes
 
David Hughes's Avatar
 
David Hughes is offline
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,685
What are grandchildren for? Pass them the baton and let them run...

Regards, David
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-16-2015   #43
traveler_101
American abroad
 
traveler_101 is offline
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Oslo, Norway
Posts: 1,080
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Hughes View Post
What are grandchildren for? Pass them the baton and let them run...

Regards, David
It's not a bad idea! At some point here, I could give one of my Bessa rangefinders to my grandson; he's thirteen or will be soon. Still a little young, I guess . . .
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-16-2015   #44
Prest_400
Multiformat
 
Prest_400's Avatar
 
Prest_400 is offline
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Sweden/Spain
Posts: 952
Quote:
Originally Posted by traveler_101 View Post
Thanks for posting. The company in Spain that does the developing say they believe in "film's new age," but some times I become dispirited and fear that most of us are are ageing - and perhaps shooting less and less film as time goes by.
I am amused how I used to regret the lack of easy labs in Spain and now they are there and they have customers from all around. IIRC it was set up by some association of a Wedding Photographers and technicians that acquired some Fuji Frontier.

It is the new model of film lab, Internet+Post based, international customer base and if you look around Instagram you will see them. IMO, that model works, as relying on local customers might not be that reliable given the niche status.


Their scans are quite good. Though every once in a while I think about getting one of those V600 to shave off the scanning costs, at least for MF. Still, I think of home scanning as a blessing and a condemnation.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-16-2015   #45
robert blu
quiet photographer
 
robert blu's Avatar
 
robert blu is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Italy
Age: 71
Posts: 6,235
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prest_400 View Post
... Though every once in a while I think about getting one of those V600 to shave off the scanning costs, at least for MF. Still, I think of home scanning as a blessing and a condemnation.
I have a V600 for my 120 films and it works well enough, sometimes I like scanning, earphones and good music help...sometimes I have to force myself to scan, with or without music

robert
__________________
Remember: today is the Day !
from Ruth Bernhard recipe for a long and happy life

my quiet photographer's blog

My RFF photos and my albums on RFF
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-17-2015   #46
MiniMoke
Registered User
 
MiniMoke is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Luxembourg
Age: 56
Posts: 455
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prest_400 View Post
.

It is the new model of film lab, Internet+Post based, international customer base and if you look around Instagram you will see them. IMO, that model works, as relying on local customers might not be that reliable given the niche status.
.
that's right, this is the future of photo labs !
__________________
Meet me at www.whyfilmcameras.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-18-2015   #47
philipus
ʎɐpɹəʇɥƃıɹq looɟɹəʇƃıɹq
 
philipus's Avatar
 
philipus is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: '(,,,,)°l°
Posts: 1,032
It's 17EUR for a roll developed and scanned at the XL resolution, no? When I see the XL scans, however, I just see heaps of artifacts (typical Frontier in my experience). I think you'd get (much) better results going the digitizing route.
__________________
philipus.com

Camera position: In general as shown in Fig. H and J, but according to requirements other positions are also possible or more practical.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-18-2015   #48
MiniMoke
Registered User
 
MiniMoke is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Luxembourg
Age: 56
Posts: 455
Quote:
Originally Posted by philipus View Post
It's 17EUR for a roll developed and scanned at the XL resolution, no? When I see the XL scans, however, I just see heaps of artifacts (typical Frontier in my experience). I think you'd get (much) better results going the digitizing route.
Did you check the second set of pictures or those in the first post? In my opinion the scans are OK, better than any I ever got out of my scanners, even the Nikon Coolscan IV.

Of course these are jpegs.... So there are artifacts when you really blow up the pictures. For my humble needs and prints it feels adequate.
__________________
Meet me at www.whyfilmcameras.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-18-2015   #49
philipus
ʎɐpɹəʇɥƃıɹq looɟɹəʇƃıɹq
 
philipus's Avatar
 
philipus is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: '(,,,,)°l°
Posts: 1,032
Hi Frank

I checked the largest size of the image on Flickr and they had pretty bad compression (?) artefacts. I rechecked the largest size now and it looks better. For auto-scans they're quite passable actually.

What one gains in scanning oneself is of course control over every aspect of the image. This will be visible in particular in shadow areas, where auto-scans, even on a Frontier, will give rather poor quality. Whether such scans are of sufficient quality will, naturally, depend on what the scan is for and one's preferences. Personally, I find 17 EUR for this quality to be much too expensive. If time and convenience is of the essence, I'd look into digitizing the negs. For the cost of not too many rolls you can create a fairly competent kit, even with a small sensor.

Br
Philip

Quote:
Originally Posted by MiniMoke View Post
Did you check the second set of pictures or those in the first post? In my opinion the scans are OK, better than any I ever got out of my scanners, even the Nikon Coolscan IV.

Of course these are jpegs.... So there are artifacts when you really blow up the pictures. For my humble needs and prints it feels adequate.
__________________
philipus.com

Camera position: In general as shown in Fig. H and J, but according to requirements other positions are also possible or more practical.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2015   #50
MiniMoke
Registered User
 
MiniMoke is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Luxembourg
Age: 56
Posts: 455
Quote:
Originally Posted by philipus View Post
Hi Frank

I checked the largest size of the image on Flickr and they had pretty bad compression (?) artefacts. I rechecked the largest size now and it looks better. For auto-scans they're quite passable actually.

What one gains in scanning oneself is of course control over every aspect of the image. This will be visible in particular in shadow areas, where auto-scans, even on a Frontier, will give rather poor quality. Whether such scans are of sufficient quality will, naturally, depend on what the scan is for and one's preferences. Personally, I find 17 EUR for this quality to be much too expensive. If time and convenience is of the essence, I'd look into digitizing the negs. For the cost of not too many rolls you can create a fairly competent kit, even with a small sensor.

Br
Philip
Right, the price is not cheap, that is clear, but for the moment I don't have the means to get a really good scanner. Of course digitizing with a camera would be a solution... I never really tried it.

What quality to expect, compared to good film scanners or Frontier scans?

Would a simple APS-C sensor camera, a vintage macro lens or 50mm standard lens with some macro tubes be adequate?. What rig to use to keep this contraption steady? Just a tripod, a light pad and some negative holder?

Lots of questions...... sorry
__________________
Meet me at www.whyfilmcameras.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2015   #51
robert blu
quiet photographer
 
robert blu's Avatar
 
robert blu is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Italy
Age: 71
Posts: 6,235
Hi Frank, Hi Philip,

yes price is not cheap. Of course it depends a lot on how much you shoot. I have a Nikon 5000ed and yes quality is more than ok, It takes about one hour to scan a roll of film in low res but large enough to make a good selection and than re-scan in high res the few keepers. This is ok if time is available.

But my scanner is an old machine and there will be a time when ti will not work, will not be serviced, and I do not see on the market a scanner with similar quality at a reasonable price.

And I like to shoot my old film cameras, this is why I'm trying various labs which can develop and scans.

Pbut I'm not always very rational robably from a real rational point of view an appropriate digital camera should be the way to go...but I'm not always very rational :-)

robert
__________________
Remember: today is the Day !
from Ruth Bernhard recipe for a long and happy life

my quiet photographer's blog

My RFF photos and my albums on RFF
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2015   #52
HHPhoto
Registered User
 
HHPhoto is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,725
Hi Frank,

Quote:
Originally Posted by MiniMoke View Post
Yes, I have become tired of scanning, and I sold my latest scanner, the not so bad Canoscan 9000F MkII.
being tired of scanning is completely understandable. It is time consuming (= meaning high costs: time is money).
And from a quality point of view it is by far the worst you can do, because the computer monitor as the viewing medium is the worst viewing medium we have (both for film and digital files). The resolution of the monitor is extremely low, and the character of the LCD elements decreases tonality and makes colour rendition worse.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MiniMoke View Post
But what now?
Film photography existed without scanning for more than 100 years . You don't have to scan. Period.
Just use the method, which gives you
- the highest possible quality
- at the lowest costs
= using reversal / positive / slide film. Both in colour and BW.

With reversal film you already have a finished picture in best quality which can be looked at.
Using a very good slide loupe and a daylight lighttable delivers an outstanding, almost 3D like quality for smaller enlargements.
The picture quality is much much better than any scanned film on a computer monitor. With a slide viewed through a slide loupe you get full resolution, sharpness and the best colour quality. No quality loss by scanning and the limits of the monitor.
Professional photographers have worked exactly this way for decades.

And if you want an even more impressive picture quality just project your slides. With a good projetion lens the quality is absolutely outstanding and surpasses by far any digital projector (they have extremely low resolution and bad colour reproduction).

Very good slide loupes, lighttables and projectors are very cheap (even new), and cheaper as a very good scanner. And it is much much cheaper than scans from a professional lab not only in the long run, but even in the mid term.

You also have not only the option for colour slides, but also for BW slides (which are absolutely unique in their tonality and sharpness).
Just use the best professional lab in your neighbourhood:
www.photostudio13.de

They offer lots of different excellent BW films in reversal processing as BW slides:
http://www.photostudio13.de/news/new...trasse-80.html

http://www.photostudio13.de/fileadmi...mationen15.pdf

With this workflow you have
- a lot of cost savings = more cash for films, or equipment, or photo travels, or models, or photo workshops.....= for all the real fun things in photography
- the best quality which is obtainable.

It is a win-win-win situation.

Some years ago I was in the same situation as you.
I've come back to reversal film (colour and BW) and printing in my darkroom.
And I've never looked back.
If I need a scan from time to time (seldom), I use a professional lab.

Cheers, Jan
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2015   #53
HHPhoto
Registered User
 
HHPhoto is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,725
Frank, just as an additional information for you:

http://www.aphog.de/?p=1038

http://www.aphog.de/wp-content/downl...Diapositiv.pdf

http://www.aphog.de/?p=364

http://www.aphog.de/?cat=28

Cheers, Jan
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2015   #54
brbo
Registered User
 
brbo's Avatar
 
brbo is offline
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,497
Quote:
Originally Posted by HHPhoto View Post
Film photography existed without scanning for more than 100 years . You don't have to scan. Period.
Yes We Scan.

Period.
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2015   #55
joeswe
Registered User
 
joeswe is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 403
Quote:
Originally Posted by HHPhoto View Post
I've come back to reversal film (colour and BW) and printing in my darkroom.
And I've never looked back.
So, how do you print your reversal film in your darkroom?
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2015   #56
Skiff
Registered User
 
Skiff is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,018
Honestly, I've never really understood all the marketing hype about "The Find Lab", "Indie Film Lab" etc. in the US,
and the labs like "Carmencita", "UK Film Lab" and at last "Mein Film Lab" who just copied the American marketing idea 1:1.

They are concentrating on scans. And not on high resolution scans, but only minilab scans.
And that (well, depending on the lab) with high to very high prices.
Often no real silver-halide prints are offered.

But scanning make sense with a real high-end-scan, and then printing it in high quality on real photo paper, on silver-halide paper.
In this case Scanning has a strength.

But it makes really no sense to just scan and watching the picture only on the computer screen. That is wasting quality.
It is the worst quality possible with film at the highest cost.

Same case with spending thousands of dollars for a 18, 24, 36 MP cam and destroying the potential by watching the pictures on the very low resolving 2k / 4k computer screens.

It is right: By using slide film you can indeed escape all these problems. It can deliver highest quality at lowest cost.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2015   #57
robert blu
quiet photographer
 
robert blu's Avatar
 
robert blu is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Italy
Age: 71
Posts: 6,235
I scan not to view on a computer monitor but to post process and inkjet print on the kind of paper I desire...

robert
__________________
Remember: today is the Day !
from Ruth Bernhard recipe for a long and happy life

my quiet photographer's blog

My RFF photos and my albums on RFF
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2015   #58
HHPhoto
Registered User
 
HHPhoto is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,725
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeswe View Post
So, how do you print your reversal film in your darkroom?
BW slides in a direct print with Harman or Imago direct positive paper with may enlarger. Probably I will try the new Galaxy paper solution next year as well.

High quality prints from colour slides is the case where a high-end-scan really makes sense. This highest quality scan is then exposed by a laser exposer like Durst Lambda or a Lightjet, or a Agfa dlb2+ exposed on RA-4 paper or Display film (for gigantic slides).
If I need that, I just get it done by a professional lab.
But labs like 'Mein Film Lab' or the other labs with that very limited business model just don't offer that.

But fortunately we have enough high-quality full service labs in Germany which offer that at very reasonable prices, like Photo Studio 13, 24h-Fotoservice, Jan Kopp, Foto Görner, Wolf, Pixelgrain etc.

For me it is about 5% of my colour slides which are also printed.

By the way, colour prints from slides often even look better (better sharpness, resolution and colour brillance) than prints from CN film.

Cheers, Jan

Last edited by HHPhoto : 11-19-2015 at 08:22. Reason: typo
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2015   #59
MiniMoke
Registered User
 
MiniMoke is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Luxembourg
Age: 56
Posts: 455
Quote:
Originally Posted by HHPhoto View Post
Thanks a lot Jan - I'll definitely give slide film a thought. Shot some Velvia and Agfa slide film, even succeeded in developing some rolls with good results.

We'll see...
__________________
Meet me at www.whyfilmcameras.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2015   #60
MiniMoke
Registered User
 
MiniMoke is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Luxembourg
Age: 56
Posts: 455
Quote:
Originally Posted by robert blu View Post
Hi Frank, Hi Philip,

And I like to shoot my old film cameras, this is why I'm trying various labs which can develop and scans.

Pbut I'm not always very rational robably from a real rational point of view an appropriate digital camera should be the way to go...but I'm not always very rational :-)

robert
From a rational point of view, film should be dead by now. But we are not rational, aren't we?

I'd take any film camera over a digital one, though I tried quite a lot (mostly Fujis) but they all overwhelmed me with settings, film simulations, special effects....

I will continue to shoot film, though temptations is always there.

Now a Leica M60..... that would perhaps be another story, but I can't even think about buying one.
__________________
Meet me at www.whyfilmcameras.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2015   #61
MiniMoke
Registered User
 
MiniMoke is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Luxembourg
Age: 56
Posts: 455
Quote:
Originally Posted by brbo View Post
Yes We Scan.

Period.
__________________
Meet me at www.whyfilmcameras.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2015   #62
MiniMoke
Registered User
 
MiniMoke is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Luxembourg
Age: 56
Posts: 455
Anyways all, thanks for your precious input and keep it coming.

Too bad the flatbeds like the Canon 9000F MkII are not really up to scan 35mm in optimal quality. And no, I won't invest in MF gear.... well, let's see, there might be something to that....

But why not such a scanner (affordable at under 200€ on Amazon) and get hight quality prints from good labs...... something else to keep me awake tonight.
__________________
Meet me at www.whyfilmcameras.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2015   #63
Spanik
Registered User
 
Spanik is offline
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeswe View Post
So, how do you print your reversal film in your darkroom?
You don't, you use a projector and look at them.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2015   #64
giganova
Registered User
 
giganova is offline
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 1,543
To me, scanning is one of the best parts of film photography. Nothing beats watching how the scanned image start building up on your screen!
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2015   #65
MiniMoke
Registered User
 
MiniMoke is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Luxembourg
Age: 56
Posts: 455
Quote:
Originally Posted by giganova View Post
To me, scanning is one of the best parts of film photography. Nothing beats watching how the scanned image start building up on your screen!
Yes, true, but with a good and FAST scanner!
__________________
Meet me at www.whyfilmcameras.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2015   #66
Bob Michaels
nobody special
 
Bob Michaels's Avatar
 
Bob Michaels is offline
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Apopka FL (USA)
Age: 76
Posts: 3,845
I am still baffled at everyone who insists on scanning 100% of what they shoot and only then editing. I have always edited negs first on a lightbox and then only scanning that small percentage of individual framesthat have future potential to be significant.

The technical part of editing on a lightbox is so easy and scanning is nothing when you can devote your best to scanning only those images that really count.

Don't get me started on those who spend big bucks on a bag full of lenses and then cannot afford a scanner of equivalent quality. Apparently they have never heard of a chain being no stronger than the weakest link.
__________________
http://www.bobmichaels.org
internet forums appear to have an abundance of anonymous midgets prancing on stilts
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2015   #67
giganova
Registered User
 
giganova is offline
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 1,543
Bob, I do exactly that, i.e. make a selection of the best negatives on my light table and only scan those.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2015   #68
gbealnz
Registered User
 
gbealnz is offline
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Hamilton, New Zealand
Posts: 186
Me too, maybe a throw back from the old days when I did it with trannies.
Heck, I did it with a contact sheet as well, only enlarged the ones that made the cut.
Gary
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-20-2015   #69
philipus
ʎɐpɹəʇɥƃıɹq looɟɹəʇƃıɹq
 
philipus's Avatar
 
philipus is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: '(,,,,)°l°
Posts: 1,032
Questions are ok Frank I should say I am no expert on digitizing - I tried it with my (now sold) EOS 5D2 and the 100L macro and had very good results. I have however looked into it for future purposes when my film scanners break down. Here are some links I've accumulated.

As you can see there are various setups. The simplest would be a LED light table (Huion makes good ones but you could use an iPad even), a stand, a camera and a good lens shot at a mid-range aperture. Another option is to use a slide duplicator of some sort and shoot against a bright background (like a light table or soft box).

Small sensor cameras can be used but one would probably need to shoot a few frames per neg and merge. Not very complicated and the time spent would still be faster than scanning methinks.

https://web.archive.org/web/20110108...99/hybrid-copy
http://www.pekkapotka.com/journal/20...0mm-macro.html
http://sculptingwithlight.blogspot.g...ica-beoon.html
http://www.dpbestflow.org/camera/camera-scanning
http://www.dpbestflow.org/camera-scan-workflow
http://www.trippingthroughthedark.co...ith-the-d800e/
http://theagnosticprint.org/future-of-scanning/
http://www.throughthefmount.com/arti..._digitise.html
http://forum.mflenses.com/slide-copy...or-t22881.html
http://photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00H7Yc
http://thedambook.com/smf/index.php?board=7.0
http://www.alanwood.net/photography/...de-copier.html
http://www.kaiser-fototechnik.de/en/...ge.asp?nr=6506
http://members.bitstream.net/~tlmartin/copiers.html

Quote:
Originally Posted by MiniMoke View Post
What quality to expect, compared to good film scanners or Frontier scans?

Would a simple APS-C sensor camera, a vintage macro lens or 50mm standard lens with some macro tubes be adequate?. What rig to use to keep this contraption steady? Just a tripod, a light pad and some negative holder?

Lots of questions...... sorry
__________________
philipus.com

Camera position: In general as shown in Fig. H and J, but according to requirements other positions are also possible or more practical.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-20-2015   #70
philipus
ʎɐpɹəʇɥƃıɹq looɟɹəʇƃıɹq
 
philipus's Avatar
 
philipus is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: '(,,,,)°l°
Posts: 1,032
Each to their own, Bob. I have set up my system so that I can scan a full roll (135 or 120) in a reasonable amout of time. While the scanner works I do a quick edit of scanned frames to have original TIFFs and JPGs with basic edits applied. This works for me because I like very much having all my images digitally. That it is time-consuming is a fact I've accepted.

I agree that to get the most out of fine lenses one will need a good scanner (or other) solution. While I probably wouldn't express myself in the same judgemental manner as you (apologies), I do agree in substance with you. However, like any hobby equipment selection is about individual choices.

br
Philip

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Michaels View Post
I am still baffled at everyone who insists on scanning 100% of what they shoot and only then editing. I have always edited negs first on a lightbox and then only scanning that small percentage of individual framesthat have future potential to be significant.

The technical part of editing on a lightbox is so easy and scanning is nothing when you can devote your best to scanning only those images that really count.

Don't get me started on those who spend big bucks on a bag full of lenses and then cannot afford a scanner of equivalent quality. Apparently they have never heard of a chain being no stronger than the weakest link.
__________________
philipus.com

Camera position: In general as shown in Fig. H and J, but according to requirements other positions are also possible or more practical.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-20-2015   #71
Merlijn53
Registered User
 
Merlijn53 is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Michaels View Post
I am still baffled at everyone who insists on scanning 100% of what they shoot and only then editing. I have always edited negs first on a lightbox and then only scanning that small percentage of individual framesthat have future potential to be significant.

The technical part of editing on a lightbox is so easy and scanning is nothing when you can devote your best to scanning only those images that really count.

Don't get me started on those who spend big bucks on a bag full of lenses and then cannot afford a scanner of equivalent quality. Apparently they have never heard of a chain being no stronger than the weakest link.
Baffled?
There are reasons to scan everything.
I scan everything on a low resolution (1200 dpi) on my Epson flatbed. I have a digital archive of all my negatives, made in 50 years. This makes it easy to find the original negative when I need it and it's much more convenient to view the positives on my screen, then negatives on a lightbox.
It hardly takes any time to make those scans on such a small resolution. If I want to use a negative, I scan it on my Imacon scanner, or print it in the darkroom. This way I find the negative I'm looking for within a minute and view it in positive on my 24 inch screen.
Frank
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-20-2015   #72
robert blu
quiet photographer
 
robert blu's Avatar
 
robert blu is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Italy
Age: 71
Posts: 6,235
Yes, what Bob suggests is the way to go, experienced photographers did and still do it always, not everybody has the ability to evaluate negatives on a light table, myself included.

And one more reason for a quick scan of all the film is the possibility to print a kind of contact sheet for archival purpose, maybe now I do not fond interesting a certain photo I took but in future nobody knows.

robert
__________________
Remember: today is the Day !
from Ruth Bernhard recipe for a long and happy life

my quiet photographer's blog

My RFF photos and my albums on RFF
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-20-2015   #73
MiniMoke
Registered User
 
MiniMoke is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Luxembourg
Age: 56
Posts: 455
Thanks a lot! Great stuff to read over the weekend!!


Quote:
Originally Posted by philipus View Post
Questions are ok Frank I should say I am no expert on digitizing - I tried it with my (now sold) EOS 5D2 and the 100L macro and had very good results. I have however looked into it for future purposes when my film scanners break down. Here are some links I've accumulated.

As you can see there are various setups. The simplest would be a LED light table (Huion makes good ones but you could use an iPad even), a stand, a camera and a good lens shot at a mid-range aperture. Another option is to use a slide duplicator of some sort and shoot against a bright background (like a light table or soft box).

Small sensor cameras can be used but one would probably need to shoot a few frames per neg and merge. Not very complicated and the time spent would still be faster than scanning methinks.

https://web.archive.org/web/20110108...99/hybrid-copy
http://www.pekkapotka.com/journal/20...0mm-macro.html
http://sculptingwithlight.blogspot.g...ica-beoon.html
http://www.dpbestflow.org/camera/camera-scanning
http://www.dpbestflow.org/camera-scan-workflow
http://www.trippingthroughthedark.co...ith-the-d800e/
http://theagnosticprint.org/future-of-scanning/
http://www.throughthefmount.com/arti..._digitise.html
http://forum.mflenses.com/slide-copy...or-t22881.html
http://photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00H7Yc
http://thedambook.com/smf/index.php?board=7.0
http://www.alanwood.net/photography/...de-copier.html
http://www.kaiser-fototechnik.de/en/...ge.asp?nr=6506
http://members.bitstream.net/~tlmartin/copiers.html
__________________
Meet me at www.whyfilmcameras.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-20-2015   #74
MiniMoke
Registered User
 
MiniMoke is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Luxembourg
Age: 56
Posts: 455
Quote:
Originally Posted by robert blu View Post
not everybody has the ability to evaluate negatives on a light table, myself included.

robert

Speaking for me too... at least for color negs
__________________
Meet me at www.whyfilmcameras.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-20-2015   #75
_lou_
Registered User
 
_lou_'s Avatar
 
_lou_ is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 122
I always had this fantasy that if I get super-rich one day, I can pay someone to scan my negatives. I find that the smaller the negative, the more I hate it, so I sometimes indulge into a 4x5 portrait or two, in which case I can't wait to scan it (unless it's out of focus)...
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-20-2015   #76
ultra8
Registered User
 
ultra8 is offline
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 29
Thumbs up

Thank you very much for the good and bad opinion of my lab in germany

I´m the owner of MeinFilmLab. We work with three C41 machines that give you an overall best quality of developing (2x Agfa FP and 1x Noritsu Processor). After developing, we scan your films on 4 frontier and 2 noritsu scanner. A drumscanner is in testing now.

Something about the quality: The XL scans from the frontiers (up to 20MPixels) and the Noritsus (up to 31MPixels) is better than any consumer scanner can produce. We scan each negative with manual filtering. If we know your style we can adjust the color, density and saturation of your films. And we can adjust the grain, sharpness and many more options. We need just to know this.

After scanning, we print your work on a dlab, epson printer or a fuji dry lab. On request, we can enlarge your work manual in the darkroom onto kodak or fuji RA4 Paper. The best quality today is to print your work with a epson printer onto hahnemuehle fiberbase paper. No dlab or frontier RA4 printer can produce such rich tones with deep, yes, deeeep blacks on a fiberbase paper. We work only with our own paper profiles.

Is our dev/scan price to high? No. Because this price includes the german tax, the developing, manual scanning and all the other cost in the lab. No other lab in germany offer this price for 20/31MPixel scans from a complete roll with a download option in germany. Other Labs, like the one in southern germany, get 12€ for one (!) Frontier Scan from your negative in our L size... And we offer consistent scans from roll to roll.

Ok, you can scan at home and offer much free time for that. But you cannot reach the colors from a frontier or noritsu scanner. We have also the dlab scanner, but the quality is not as good as a frontier or noritsu scan so we don´t offer scans from that scanner.

At the moment we move to a bigger office. Next year we plan a lot of workshops, festivals and some open doors for all filmshooters.

We are very limited? throw an eye on us in the near future :-)

Have a great weekend,
Jörg
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-21-2015   #77
philipus
ʎɐpɹəʇɥƃıɹq looɟɹəʇƃıɹq
 
philipus's Avatar
 
philipus is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: '(,,,,)°l°
Posts: 1,032
Thanks for chiming in Jörg. It's all about the old time-money equation. My preference is to work with my own films and images but I know that's not for everyone. I'm certainly happy if you have enough a customer base to keep going. I do disagree however that it would not be possible when scanning at home to achieve colour and quality better than what a Frontier or Noritsu gives.



Quote:
Originally Posted by ultra8 View Post
Thank you very much for the good and bad opinion of my lab in germany



I´m the owner of MeinFilmLab. We work with three C41 machines that give you an overall best quality of developing (2x Agfa FP and 1x Noritsu Processor). After developing, we scan your films on 4 frontier and 2 noritsu scanner. A drumscanner is in testing now.



Something about the quality: The XL scans from the frontiers (up to 20MPixels) and the Noritsus (up to 31MPixels) is better than any consumer scanner can produce. We scan each negative with manual filtering. If we know your style we can adjust the color, density and saturation of your films. And we can adjust the grain, sharpness and many more options. We need just to know this.



After scanning, we print your work on a dlab, epson printer or a fuji dry lab. On request, we can enlarge your work manual in the darkroom onto kodak or fuji RA4 Paper. The best quality today is to print your work with a epson printer onto hahnemuehle fiberbase paper. No dlab or frontier RA4 printer can produce such rich tones with deep, yes, deeeep blacks on a fiberbase paper. We work only with our own paper profiles.



Is our dev/scan price to high? No. Because this price includes the german tax, the developing, manual scanning and all the other cost in the lab. No other lab in germany offer this price for 20/31MPixel scans from a complete roll with a download option in germany. Other Labs, like the one in southern germany, get 12€ for one (!) Frontier Scan from your negative in our L size... And we offer consistent scans from roll to roll.



Ok, you can scan at home and offer much free time for that. But you cannot reach the colors from a frontier or noritsu scanner. We have also the dlab scanner, but the quality is not as good as a frontier or noritsu scan so we don´t offer scans from that scanner.



At the moment we move to a bigger office. Next year we plan a lot of workshops, festivals and some open doors for all filmshooters.



We are very limited? throw an eye on us in the near future :-)



Have a great weekend,

Jörg
__________________
philipus.com

Camera position: In general as shown in Fig. H and J, but according to requirements other positions are also possible or more practical.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-21-2015   #78
MiniMoke
Registered User
 
MiniMoke is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Luxembourg
Age: 56
Posts: 455
Thanks Jörg,

I will surely rely on your services in the future.

You are doing a great job for those of us who really want to shoot film but are put off by the scanning chore.

I was pondering another scanner, of the cheaper variation, but that would be counterproductive for me (yes, others may think different). The price of à scanner and above all the price of my time pays for a lot of professional scans.
__________________
Meet me at www.whyfilmcameras.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-21-2015   #79
ultra8
Registered User
 
ultra8 is offline
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by MiniMoke View Post
Thanks Jörg,

I will surely rely on your services in the future.

You are doing a great job for those of us who really want to shoot film but are put off by the scanning chore.

I was pondering another scanner, of the cheaper variation, but that would be counterproductive for me (yes, others may think different). The price of à scanner and above all the price of my time pays for a lot of professional scans.
Thank you,

the pacon scanner are not bad, but limited in resolution. A better one is a Frontier SP500. This is a modern standalone Scanner for 35mm films with the same software and resolution than our SP3000 tables. But all the Fuji machines don´t have an easy button. If something goes wrong you need professional help and that is very expensive.

If you need a discount for higher amounts of films let me know that

Best,
Jörg
  Reply With Quote

I need your advice....
Old 01-04-2016   #80
MiniMoke
Registered User
 
MiniMoke is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Luxembourg
Age: 56
Posts: 455
I need your advice....

Here are 2 versions of the same scan, one from the professional service and one with my scanner. I won't say what scanner I have!

I have a decision to make, and I'd like as many opinions as I might get....

Which one do you prefer?

1 by Frank Lehnen, on Flickr

2 by Frank Lehnen, on Flickr
__________________
Meet me at www.whyfilmcameras.com
  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 05:07.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, 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.