Another camera scanner start-up ...
Old 07-04-2019   #1
dmr
Registered Abuser
 
dmr's Avatar
 
dmr is offline
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Somewhere in Middle America
Posts: 4,521
Another camera scanner start-up ...

Is this useful? Or is it HWGA?

https://www.dpreview.com/news/990875...canning-system
__________________
My (NEW) Gallery
My Blog
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-05-2019   #2
Tijmendal
Young photog
 
Tijmendal is offline
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Amsterdam, Netherlands
Age: 28
Posts: 506
This is ridiculously expensive. It does nothing except feed the film over a light table....
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-05-2019   #3
kiemchacsu
Registered User
 
kiemchacsu is offline
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Hanoi, Vietnam
Age: 38
Posts: 1,019
i dont believe in crowd funding.
just release product and we will decide if we want to buy it (or not)
just a few seconds of product video and convincing us to buy is totally BS
__________________
Cheers,
Trung Nguyen

RF
F
photo essays: Hanoi | Hoi An | Ha Giang | Fish Market
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-05-2019   #4
Steve M.
Registered User
 
Steve M. is offline
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,382
It's cute, but why not buy a Monolta Scan Dual for $100-$200 and get results that are essentially as good as my old Nikon film scanners? Those Minoltas give you 2850 PPI vs 4000 for the Nikon, and 2850 will give you a nice 12x18 print.

Besides, as mentioned in the articles comments, who stores their uncut 35mm negs whole on a roll?
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-05-2019   #5
Larry Cloetta
Registered User
 
Larry Cloetta is offline
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Jackson, WY
Age: 69
Posts: 1,488
I looked at that yesterday, I don’t need it as I am pretty well outfitted for scanning already, but I continue to be glad that there are some people out there trying to do things for the film community. This device, which appears well made and thought out, could be useful for someone just starting out, even if I don’t need it. It doesn’t look like an inherently bad product to me, unless I am missing something. Keeps fingerprints off negs, helps with dust control and film flatness, all good things. There are other ways to do those things, but so what. For someone who shoots film, but is never going to print in a traditional darkroom (those people are out there) it would aid a slightly different workflow than most of us use. No need to ever spend time cutting negs into 6 frame strips and messing with sheets of film holders kept in binders. Just scan the uncut roll, and stick it back into a labeled and indexed film canister when you are done. Not a bad idea, and it would be time saving for some.

As far as cost is concerned, it was more than I wanted to spend for the added utility it would provide me, personally, but it certainly was not out of line with what the development and manufacturing cost would be for a low volume production item which would allow them to sell these at enough profit to stay in business.

Sometimes I think there should just be a separate forum here at RFF called “It’s Too Expensive!”, where people consistently disposed to post that thought about any and everything, lenses, cameras, software, etc. could make their inevitable feelings known without everyone else having to wade through them in every single new thread. Just a thought
__________________
Larry

“It is about time we take photography seriously and treat it as a hobby.” Elliot Erwitt
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-05-2019   #6
Veggies
Registered User
 
Veggies is online now
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry Cloetta View Post
I looked at that yesterday, I don’t need it as I am pretty well outfitted for scanning already, but I continue to be glad that there are some people out there trying to do things for the film community. This device, which appears well made and thought out, could be useful for someone just starting out, even if I don’t need it. It doesn’t look like an inherently bad product to me, unless I am missing something. Keeps fingerprints off negs, helps with dust control and film flatness, all good things. There are other ways to do those things, but so what. For someone who shoots film, but is never going to print in a traditional darkroom (those people are out there) it would aid a slightly different workflow than most of us use. No need to ever spend time cutting negs into 6 frame strips and messing with sheets of film holders kept in binders. Just scan the uncut roll, and stick it back into a labeled and indexed film canister when you are done. Not a bad idea, and it would be time saving for some.

As far as cost is concerned, it was more than I wanted to spend for the added utility it would provide me, personally, but it certainly was not out of line with what the development and manufacturing cost would be for a low volume production item which would allow them to sell these at enough profit to stay in business.

Sometimes I think there should just be a separate forum here at RFF called “It’s Too Expensive!”, where people consistently disposed to post that thought about any and everything, lenses, cameras, software, etc. could make their inevitable feelings known without everyone else having to wade through them in every single new thread. Just a thought
I'd second that. Maybe call the forum "Old People Yelling at Clouds"
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-05-2019   #7
richardHaw
junk scavenger
 
richardHaw's Avatar
 
richardHaw is offline
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Tokyo
Posts: 417
Nikon's new system is easier to use.
and it costs less

i just modified the original one, that saves me money
__________________
Take me down to the Parallax City
Where the viewfinder's tiny
And the framing is tricky
http://www.richardhaw.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-05-2019   #8
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,603
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry Cloetta View Post
...

Sometimes I think there should just be a separate forum here at RFF called “It’s Too Expensive!”, where people consistently disposed to post that thought about any and everything, lenses, cameras, software, etc. could make their inevitable feelings known without everyone else having to wade through them in every single new thread. Just a thought
Quote:
Originally Posted by Veggies View Post
I'd second that. Maybe call the forum "Old People Yelling at Clouds"
Or... maybe those complaining about the price are right.

Weird thing is I have this device in front of me right now made by this little company that everyone loves called Lomography.
It is their film scanner that feeds film through it that is meant to be used with your cell phone. BUT, and it's big butt, you can use it with your DSLR!!! Just take off the pieces that allow you to connect your cell phone.
And it also has it's own built in light source!

So Lomo already makes this - that you can modify in any sweet way you like. And it costs $40. $40. Wait did I mention it costs $40?

https://shop.lomography.com/en/acces...tphone-scanner

So bless you yellers at clouds. Curmudgeons on lawn chairs. Because you know what you speak of!
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-05-2019   #9
splitimageview
Registered User
 
splitimageview is offline
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1,979
Will that Lomo scanner work with this app?

https://filmlabapp.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-05-2019   #10
Larry Cloetta
Registered User
 
Larry Cloetta is offline
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Jackson, WY
Age: 69
Posts: 1,488
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
.. BUT, and it's big butt,.....
Okay then, if that’s the way you feel about it. Like Kardashian size?
__________________
Larry

“It is about time we take photography seriously and treat it as a hobby.” Elliot Erwitt
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-05-2019   #11
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,603
Quote:
Originally Posted by splitimageview View Post
Will that Lomo scanner work with this app?

https://filmlabapp.com
No. I tried it, it is completely useless. I actually was very disappointed as I thought that finally I could use that app.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-05-2019   #12
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,603
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry Cloetta View Post
Okay then, if that’s the way you feel about it. Like Kardashian size?
You would prefer to give $400 + to a kickstarter that may never happen, when the product is already available for $40?
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-05-2019   #13
dourbalistar
Registered User
 
dourbalistar's Avatar
 
dourbalistar is online now
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 2,246
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
BUT, and it's big butt...
I like big BUTs and I cannot lie
You other prepositions can't deny...
...
Baby got back(light)

Seriously though, I agree with Larry. I wouldn't buy one because it doesn't solve some of my needs, but we need more people like this for our film enthusiast community, not fewer.
__________________
I like my lenses sharp as a tank and built like a tack.

flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-05-2019   #14
Larry Cloetta
Registered User
 
Larry Cloetta is offline
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Jackson, WY
Age: 69
Posts: 1,488
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
You would prefer to give $400 + to a kickstarter that may never happen, when the product is already available for $40?
It’s not the same product, for one thing. Maybe that is enough things.
__________________
Larry

“It is about time we take photography seriously and treat it as a hobby.” Elliot Erwitt
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-05-2019   #15
Larry Cloetta
Registered User
 
Larry Cloetta is offline
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Jackson, WY
Age: 69
Posts: 1,488
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
Or... maybe those complaining about the price are right.
Right in what way? That it’s more than they personally want to spend, or that it’s “too expensive”, a description of a feeling, not of any objective reality.
__________________
Larry

“It is about time we take photography seriously and treat it as a hobby.” Elliot Erwitt
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-05-2019   #16
dourbalistar
Registered User
 
dourbalistar's Avatar
 
dourbalistar is online now
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 2,246
I see it as an updated version of the Beseler Negatrans film carrier, purpose-designed for a new generation of hybrid film shooters like me who digitize film using a digital camera. Speaking of which, I tried the Negatrans, but couldn't get it to work well (i.e., maintain planarity) with my Leica BEOON rig. So now the Negatrans sits in my closet unused for the time being.
__________________
I like my lenses sharp as a tank and built like a tack.

flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-05-2019   #17
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,603
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry Cloetta View Post
It’s not the same product, for one thing. Maybe that is enough things.
I know, the $40 Lomo one offers more. A way to attach your phone (if you want) and a back lit light source.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-05-2019   #18
Hogarth Ferguson
Registered User
 
Hogarth Ferguson's Avatar
 
Hogarth Ferguson is offline
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 637
I do find the complaining about the price funny, considering this is a forum replete with people ready to plonk down 8k on a leica m10p when they already have a leica m10.



The cost is ok with some because they are willing to pay it, just as your leica q2 to complement your SL and m10 are costs you are ok with. Or your third canon p or 4th olympus OM



There are other options, many other options, and this just an addition to that lineup. I backed it because I don't want to make my own, I don't want to use nikon's scanning rig, my bellows attachment hasn't worked as I expected, flatbed scans don't work for me with 35mm, a minolta scanner is old and not what I want to use.



This all boils down to value. If someone sees a value in it and they want to spend their money on it, good. Next time one of you decides to post that you bought a thambaror a summilux, i'll remind you that lomo also makes M mount lenses or 7artisans does.
__________________
My Website
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-06-2019   #19
joe bosak
Registered User
 
joe bosak is offline
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
I know, the $40 Lomo one offers more. A way to attach your phone (if you want) and a back lit light source.


Sorely tempting at that price, thanks for the heads up!
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-06-2019   #20
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,603
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hogarth Ferguson View Post

This all boils down to value. If someone sees a value in it and they want to spend their money on it, good. Next time one of you decides to post that you bought a thambaror a summilux, i'll remind you that lomo also makes M mount lenses or 7artisans does.
There is a big difference here. Those lenses give a different look to the image so you could argue why u need a Summilux vs 7A.

These film holders do not.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-06-2019   #21
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,603
Quote:
Originally Posted by joe bosak View Post
Sorely tempting at that price, thanks for the heads up!
Heads up - I found it unsatisfying for copying with a phone. The final image was just too small for my use. But it has the feeding mechanism and holds film so you could strip it down to use it w a digicam.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-06-2019   #22
ColSebastianMoran
( IRL Richard Karash )
 
ColSebastianMoran's Avatar
 
ColSebastianMoran is offline
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,339
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
So Lomo already makes this - that you can modify in any sweet way you like. And it costs $40. $40. Wait did I mention it costs $40?

https://shop.lomography.com/en/acces...tphone-scanner
Sorry, but that LOMO device is cheap and imprecise. The film-mover is a toy, and doesn't hold negative flat. MAYBE it could be useful for iPhone scans, but even that is doubtful.

I have one. I have repurposed one of the stacking pieces as a spacer for iPhone macro.
__________________
Col. Sebastian Moran, ret. (not really)

In Classifieds Now: Nothing.
Use this link to leave feedback for me.

Named "Best heavy-game shooter in the Eastern Empire." Clubs: Anglo-Indian, Tankerville, and Bagatelle Card Club.
Sony E/FE, Nikon dSLR, and iPhone digital. Misc film.
Birds, portraits, events, family. Mindfulness, reflection, creativity, and stance.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-06-2019   #23
Hogarth Ferguson
Registered User
 
Hogarth Ferguson's Avatar
 
Hogarth Ferguson is offline
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 637
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
There is a big difference here. Those lenses give a different look to the image so you could argue why u need a Summilux vs 7A.

These film holders do not.

Given that you have not used this scanning apparatus, I can't agree with you. You can speculate, but nothing other than that.



One could argue that a summilux is nothing but a name, i see no difference in how it renders. All i'm saying is, price may be objective but value is subjective, if someone sees value in something that you don't, move on. There is no need to knock something so much just because it does not fit your needs.
__________________
My Website
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-06-2019   #24
joe bosak
Registered User
 
joe bosak is offline
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 102
Hmm that lomo contraption doesn't sound quite so exciting now haha. I did wonder about the images given the orientation of the film - it's at right angles to the sensor? And even so, can you get the camera near enough to make the image big enough with a phone. I was thinking of it as maybe being a quick and easy way to scan panoramic shots, noblex or horizon, but I'd want a decent image.
  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 17:58.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, 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.