Bloody scanning

[Kev M]

It's the one bit of film photography I really dislike, sitting here listening to my scanner hum away. What's annoying me more is the fact it's playing silly buggers because the shots are low key and it's having trouble picking them up. I wish it would scan them on full blast and let me worry about the finer points.

 

[Steve Smith]

It's the one bit of film photography I really dislike

It's the one bit of film photography I don't do. I use an enlarger instead!

Actually, I wouldn't even say scanning was a part of film photography.



Steve.

 

[Gandhi]

it is part of film photography. Its just a hybridised process. If you can get results that match traditional wet printing then it is fine imho.

I'm a scanner. I used to be a printer, but I fell off the wagon

 

[joxby]

I'm a wannabe printer.

Scanning is......the best there is for convenience, I'm past convenience

The absolute killer with scanning is....dust.
I don't mind scanning time, or any of the other stuff, but dust really wastes my life :annoyed:

 

[Kev M]

Actually, I wouldn't even say scanning was a part of film photography.

You might be right Steve but with a lack of knowledge, equipment or facilities it's the best I can do to make using film a possibility. However after getting two rolls done I've looked at the next three and decided the shots aren't worth the time and effort of scanning. Thank god it's slide film not print so I can make that decision.

I thought about starting a seperate thread but hopefully you lot will pop back in to see this next question. I'm using an Epson 4490 to scan 120 slide film, not the best scanner or film holder but it's what I've got.

I haven't got a loupe but looking at the slides they look pretty good. However once scanned, if I pixel peep they're soft to the point of looking OOF. Perhaps they are and the slides are too small to tell. Can anyone recommend someone who will do a traditional print from slide not a scan and inkjet job so I can see if they're unsharp or OOF when printed. Or am I applying the digital thing to film and worrying about critical sharpness at ridiculous levels?:shrug:

 

[raathistle]

no recommendations I'm afraid for Ilfo/cibachromes, although I've got a couple of slides I want proper prints of. A quick google says BPDphotec.com do it and are used by the big boys of landscape togging, Charlie Waite and Joe Cornish. Don't seem very expensive either

 

[joxby]

I struggled a lot with the 4490, number one problem ?.....sharpness.
I've said before why I think that is, in the end I gave away the dmax shadow detail value of the scanner, for the sharper image of dslr slide copying.
Trouble with that is, the camera blows the highlights in the slide in same way it blows highlights in an actual scene, and drops detail in the blacks, scanners do a far better job in that respect.
This Minolta isn't pin sharp, but it is consistently sharper, still need a bit of USM in edit though.