Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
Thread started 10 Jul 2009 (Friday) 22:47
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

*Post Your Film Shots*

 
BrianS
Senior Member
Avatar
412 posts
Joined May 2006
Location: San Francisco, CA
     
Oct 16, 2013 12:14 as a reply to  @ post 8262691 |  #856

Herbert680 wrote in post #16368536 (external link)
Very nice shots guys! What do you use to scan them? [PICTURES REMOVED]

Avast is blocking these as "Malicious URL Blocked". I get a red popup when the page loads.


Canon 5D3, Leica M6, Fujifilm x100 & Olympus E-M5 | Walkabout Street (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
cito17
Senior Member
Avatar
724 posts
Likes: 21
Joined Feb 2008
Location: SF Bay Area
     
Oct 16, 2013 16:45 |  #857

kf095 wrote in post #16375378 (external link)
Epson V500.

QUOTED IMAGE
EOS200, 50L, FujiFilm x-tra 400.

How is the Epson V500 for scanning? I'm in the market for a reasonably priced negative scanner.


-Adrian [ Flickr ] (external link)[ Tumblr. ] (external link)[Full Gear List]
[ EOS 5D III|EOS 30D|Canonet QL17 G-III|Olympus OM-1|Rolleiflex MX-EVS|Leica M2 ]

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TooManyShots
Cream of the Crop
10,203 posts
Likes: 525
Joined Jan 2008
Location: NYC
     
Oct 16, 2013 18:22 |  #858
bannedPermanent ban

cito17 wrote in post #16376384 (external link)
How is the Epson V500 for scanning? I'm in the market for a reasonably priced negative scanner.


Most entry level scanners, sub 2k ones, are usually adequate for medium format scans up to certain resolutions. I used a Canon 9000f and scanning my medium format negatives at 10k resolution and then to downscale to 5000. I think the image quality is OK enough. With 35mm, I have to downscale from 5000 to 2500. I think a 5x7 print is OK but not sure about 8x10. Flatbed scanners are usually not quite good with 35mm negatives. Most people would recommend you to get a dedicated 35mm scanner. They are about $200 to $400. Unfortunately, there are no mid price scanners. The most fancy, affordable flatbed film scanner is the Epson v700 series. They are still just OK for 35mm negatives. If you have the money, Nikon Coolscan is the number 1 choice but they are expensive and Nikon does not make them anymore.

And, of course, how you scan your negatives is an art in itself. Do a search on the message board and I think you may find some info in how to best scan your negatives.


One Imaging Photography (external link) and my Flickr (external link)
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kf095
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,505 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 277
Joined Dec 2009
Location: Canada, Ontario, Milton
     
Oct 16, 2013 21:28 |  #859

cito17 wrote in post #16376384 (external link)
How is the Epson V500 for scanning? I'm in the market for a reasonably priced negative scanner.

Here is no alternative which supports 135 and MF with price tag bellow $200.
Epson SW works fine with ICE for color scans. But it still adds some digital noise for color negatives.
I'm going to buy Plustek 8100, which has better resolution for 135 and keeping V500 for MF.
Check my Flickr almost all film pictures are scanned with V500.


Old Site (external link). M-E and ME blog (external link). Film Flickr (external link). my DigitaL and AnaLog Gear.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Judsonzhao
Goldmember
Avatar
1,198 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Feb 2012
Location: Dallas, TX
     
Oct 16, 2013 21:44 |  #860

I saw someone on GetDPI selling V600 for $125, pretty good price, he is in LA I believe.


Fly me away.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TooManyShots
Cream of the Crop
10,203 posts
Likes: 525
Joined Jan 2008
Location: NYC
     
Oct 16, 2013 22:25 as a reply to  @ Judsonzhao's post |  #861
bannedPermanent ban

As for the scanners, I think it has much to do with what you would do with the photos. If you aren't going to print big beyond 8x10, there are no reasons why one would need the top of the line scanner. I think most entry level scanners can produce acceptable image quality for web viewing, assuming you manage to "master" the art of scanning (getting the film flat on the scanner glass--all of the included film holders are garbage, correctly adjust the color casts and color correction, getting the right resolution without blowing the size too big--there are certain points in the resolution enlargement in which you won't see any more details..just inflating the size of the image file). If you need some high res and high quality scans, you can outsource the job to a pro lab. Far much cheaper than dropping few grands on a film scanner. :)


One Imaging Photography (external link) and my Flickr (external link)
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
edge100
Goldmember
1,920 posts
Likes: 16
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Toronto, Canada
     
Oct 17, 2013 08:28 |  #862

Ahh, film scanners. The topic I love to hate.

For 35mm, the Plustek scanners represent an outrageous value. They're grain limited on most films, meaning that they extract all of the useable detail out of the film. They're cheap, too. The only drawback is the full-manual film loading, which means you can't batch scan. But if you can put up with that (in reality, a roll of 36 frames scanned at 3600dpi takes perhaps 1h to go through), then the Plustek scanners are ridiculously good.

If you want batch scanning and you're just doing 35mm, you're looking at a used Minolta (Dual Scan IV or Elite 5400/5400mkII) or Nikon (Coolscan IV, V). These are good scanners (especially the late-model Nikons), but they're not supported by the manufacturers anymore, so if they fail, you're SOL.

If you shoot medium format, you have very few options without spending $$$ on an Imacon. The Nikon 9000ED is the best desktop scanner, but it's gotten sill expensive on the used market, and again, isn't serviced by Nikon anymore. The Nikon 8000ED is more reasonably priced, but again: no service. Alternatives include the Minolta Scan Multi Pro (a GREAT scanner) and the Polaroid SprintScan 120.

The best value in MF scanning right now is the Plustek OpticFilm 120, which is $1999 new from B&H. Reports suggest that it resolves as well as the 9000ED, but may have slightly lower DMax. It also ONLY works with Silverfast, which means no Vuescan (for now). Finally, the Plustek does not autofocus, and early versions suffered from focus issues. Plustek is now checking focus on each and every scanner that ships, which is great customer service, but means the scanners are not routinely available. If you want one and see one for sale, buy it (as long as you're sure it's from a recent batch).

In terms of flatbeds, the Epson V700/V750 are the undisputed champs of current models. They'll give you 2200-2300 dpi of real resolution, which means from a 6x6 neg, you're getting ~5000x5000 images, which is enough for a fairly large print @ 240-360 dpi. The Epson V600 and Canon CanoScan 9000F are second tier flatbeds, giving about 1700dpi. Not great, but still useable for A3+ prints.

My strategy is to scan all my MF film with my 9000F, and then scan the best images on an Imacon. 35mm is all Plustek, with no need to re-scan.


Street and editorial photography in Toronto, Canada (external link)
Mirrorless: Fujifilm X-Pro1
Film: Leica MP | Leica M2 | CV Nokton 35/1.4 | CV Nokton 40 f/1.4 | Leitz Summitar 50 f/2 | Canon 50 f/1.2 LTM | Mamiya 7 | Mamiya 80 f/4.0 | Mamiya 150 f/4.5 | Mamiya 43 f/4.5
How to get good colour from C-41 film scans (external link)

Digitizing film with a digital camera (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TooManyShots
Cream of the Crop
10,203 posts
Likes: 525
Joined Jan 2008
Location: NYC
     
Oct 19, 2013 23:38 as a reply to  @ post 16375378 |  #863
bannedPermanent ban

I think I have just discovered my magical film, Kodak Ektar 100. The film has such a high resolving power and fine grain that even my 5000k resolution scan, 35mm, from my Canon 9000f, looks sharp.

IMAGE: http://www.oneimagingphotography.com/Nature/Film-Photography/Color/i-LQLccKr/0/XL/Scan-131020-0003-XL.jpg


IMAGE: http://www.oneimagingphotography.com/Nature/Film-Photography/Color/i-g6FrwN6/0/XL/Scan-131019-0014-XL.jpg


IMAGE: http://www.oneimagingphotography.com/Nature/Film-Photography/Color/i-TLbJDfN/0/XL/Scan-131019-0009-XL.jpg


IMAGE: http://www.oneimagingphotography.com/Nature/Film-Photography/Color/i-PVTX5pq/0/XL/Scan-131019-0010-XL.jpg

One Imaging Photography (external link) and my Flickr (external link)
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
edge100
Goldmember
1,920 posts
Likes: 16
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Toronto, Canada
     
Oct 20, 2013 06:04 |  #864

Ektar is a great film, but needs good light to look its best. It's also prone to colour shifts at over and underexposure.


Street and editorial photography in Toronto, Canada (external link)
Mirrorless: Fujifilm X-Pro1
Film: Leica MP | Leica M2 | CV Nokton 35/1.4 | CV Nokton 40 f/1.4 | Leitz Summitar 50 f/2 | Canon 50 f/1.2 LTM | Mamiya 7 | Mamiya 80 f/4.0 | Mamiya 150 f/4.5 | Mamiya 43 f/4.5
How to get good colour from C-41 film scans (external link)

Digitizing film with a digital camera (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
telephoto500
Member
Avatar
155 posts
Likes: 11
Joined Sep 2008
     
Oct 20, 2013 14:52 |  #865

shot with canon A-1 with 50mm 1.4 on hp5+, scanned with a flatbed.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.



HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


shuttertreasure.com
https://www.flickr.com​/photos/138443754@N08/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TooManyShots
Cream of the Crop
10,203 posts
Likes: 525
Joined Jan 2008
Location: NYC
     
Oct 22, 2013 19:58 as a reply to  @ post 16375378 |  #866
bannedPermanent ban

Testing out Ilford FP4+ 125. I got a 100ft roll too. :) It seems to have the traditional BW film grain. Tmax is still finer but Ilford has the contrast.

<a href="http://www.flick​r.com/photos/vracing/1​0430328625/" title="Scan-131022-0006 by vracing, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm8.stat​icflickr.com/7379/1043​0328625_0cd2f6031f_c.j​pg" width="800" height="533" alt="Scan-131022-0006"></a>


One Imaging Photography (external link) and my Flickr (external link)
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TooManyShots
Cream of the Crop
10,203 posts
Likes: 525
Joined Jan 2008
Location: NYC
     
Oct 22, 2013 20:00 as a reply to  @ post 16375378 |  #867
bannedPermanent ban

Testing out Ilford FP4+ 125. I got a 100ft roll too. :) It seems to have the traditional BW film grain. Tmax is still finer but Ilford has the contrast.


IMAGE: http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7379/10430328625_0cd2f6031f_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/vracing/1043032​8625/  (external link)
Scan-131022-0006 (external link) by vracing (external link), on Flickr


IMAGE: http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7348/10431121704_a8ee79959b_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/vracing/1043112​1704/  (external link)
Scan-131022-0015 (external link) by vracing (external link), on Flickr


IMAGE: http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7294/10431129004_0b7e117e05_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/vracing/1043112​9004/  (external link)
Scan-131022-0011 (external link) by vracing (external link), on Flickr


IMAGE: http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7413/10430317066_7a4cc7b86e_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/vracing/1043031​7066/  (external link)
Scan-131022-0010 (external link) by vracing (external link), on Flickr


IMAGE: http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3667/10430309244_12fd18924c_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/vracing/1043030​9244/  (external link)
Scan-131022-0002 (external link) by vracing (external link), on Flickr

One Imaging Photography (external link) and my Flickr (external link)
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
helloagain36
Goldmember
Avatar
1,490 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Feb 2009
Location: West Chester Pennsylvania
     
Oct 22, 2013 23:16 as a reply to  @ TooManyShots's post |  #868

Here's a handful of images from my first ever senior session. Shot on a mix of Mamiya 645AFD and Canon 1N/35L. All 400H dev/scan by the FindLab.

IMAGE: http://www.dbwimages.com/photos/i-mF9TMWD/0/M/i-mF9TMWD-M.jpg

IMAGE: http://www.dbwimages.com/photos/i-QjCfNBt/0/M/i-QjCfNBt-M.jpg

IMAGE: http://www.dbwimages.com/photos/i-m4jJkkV/0/M/i-m4jJkkV-M.jpg

IMAGE: http://www.dbwimages.com/photos/i-dZGfmJF/0/M/i-dZGfmJF-M.jpg

IMAGE: http://www.dbwimages.com/photos/i-PLHtk23/0/M/i-PLHtk23-M.jpg

IMAGE: http://www.dbwimages.com/photos/i-XZxxJpG/0/M/i-XZxxJpG-M.jpg

IMAGE: http://www.dbwimages.com/photos/i-52QWVSP/0/M/i-52QWVSP-M.jpg

_______________
Pennsylvania Wedding Photographer
Facebook (external link) | Twitter (external link) | Gear
www.siousca.com (external link)
-Dave

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tmckitterick
Member
38 posts
Joined Oct 2013
     
Oct 22, 2013 23:30 |  #869

NICE! ^^^

Did you do post processing in LR after getting scans back?


5D mkII | 50 1.8 II | 85 1.8 | 24-70 2.8L | 430ex II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
helloagain36
Goldmember
Avatar
1,490 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Feb 2009
Location: West Chester Pennsylvania
     
Oct 23, 2013 10:41 |  #870

tmckitterick wrote in post #16391817 (external link)
NICE! ^^^

Did you do post processing in LR after getting scans back?

Thanks! Very little, mostly just a few minor curves and levels adjustments in Photoshop.


_______________
Pennsylvania Wedding Photographer
Facebook (external link) | Twitter (external link) | Gear
www.siousca.com (external link)
-Dave

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

723,695 views & 2,110 likes for this thread
*Post Your Film Shots*
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is angkorphoto
885 guests, 342 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.