B&W negatives. Help needed.

"Mike Steward" wrote in message

I have a large collection of B&W negatives and colour transparencies which I
would like to transfer
my computer.

Is there a scanner available to do this job ?

Yeah , you’ll get one in your local PC store or Dixons etc maybe.

—
RobertJM

Mike Steward wrote:

I have a large collection of B&W negatives and colour transparencies which I would like to transfer
my computer.

Is there a scanner available to do this job ?

What is the best way ?

Mike S.

Hi Mike
There are dedicated film scanners though they are expensive check out http://www.nikonusa.com/template.php?cat=1&grp=98 and also http://www.microtekusa.com/products.html .

There is also adaptors available for some digital cameras. The factors I would consider is time the amount of money involved scanner versus camera adaptor and I have heard of reports saying that the adaptors for digital cameras may cause problems with the camera due to the repeated exposure to high intensity light.

Denis

"Mike Steward" wrote:

I have a large collection of B&W negatives and colour transparencies which I would like to transfer
my computer.

Is there a scanner available to do this job ?

Yes, there are regular scanner with adapter to scan negative film, and there are film scanner.

What is the best way ?

"The Best" way is to get them scanned as easiest/fastest as you can. If you are the richest then you can hide other to do the service, or if you don’t know how to do it then samething hiring someone to do it for you would do.

Come back here if you settle for "the second best" <bg>.

P.S. hahaha it’s so funny to see someone doesn’t have a clue of what to do *but* want nothing but "THE BEST" <bg>

Mike S.

On Sat, 24 Nov 2007 11:43:53 -0600, Joel wrote:

"Mike Steward" wrote:

I have a large collection of B&W negatives and colour transparencies which I would like to transfer
my computer.

Is there a scanner available to do this job ?

Yes, there are regular scanner with adapter to scan negative film, and there are film scanner.

What is the best way ?

"The Best" way is to get them scanned as easiest/fastest as you can. If you are the richest then you can hide other to do the service, or if you don’t know how to do it then samething hiring someone to do it for you would do.

Come back here if you settle for "the second best" <bg>.
P.S. hahaha it’s so funny to see someone doesn’t have a clue of what to do *but* want nothing but "THE BEST" <bg>

I see nothing wrong with asking for the best way. That’s taken to mean the easiest, the fastest, and the method that produces the best results. Sometimes those are conflicting goals, and sometimes the cost is a factor.

Dedicated slide and negative scanners are probably the best way, and flatbeds with slide and negative scanning accessories are probably the next best.

The problem for the personal user with a dedicated slide and negative scanner is that once all of your slides and negatives are scanned and converted, the dedicated slide scanner is of no further use. And, they are expensive ranging up to $1,100. You have to divide the number of slides and negatives into the cost of the scanner to see if it’s cost effective compared to sending the slides and negatives out to a service.

The unit could be re-sold on eBay, but that can be a hassle and safely packing and shipping is no easy task.

That leaves the second-best method as the new "best". A flatbed with slide and negative accessories and a digital ICE program, combined with some Photoshop tweaking, can work out. The flatbed has further use as a regular scanner.

A little Googling will produce recommendations of scanners and techniques.

—

Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL

tony cooper wrote:

On Sat, 24 Nov 2007 11:43:53 -0600, Joel wrote:

"Mike Steward" wrote:

I have a large collection of B&W negatives and colour transparencies which I would like to transfer
my computer.

Is there a scanner available to do this job ?

Yes, there are regular scanner with adapter to scan negative film, and there are film scanner.

What is the best way ?

"The Best" way is to get them scanned as easiest/fastest as you can. If you are the richest then you can hide other to do the service, or if you don’t know how to do it then samething hiring someone to do it for you would do.

Come back here if you settle for "the second best" <bg>.
P.S. hahaha it’s so funny to see someone doesn’t have a clue of what to do *but* want nothing but "THE BEST" <bg>

I see nothing wrong with asking for the best way. That’s taken to mean the easiest, the fastest, and the method that produces the best results. Sometimes those are conflicting goals, and sometimes the cost is a factor.

And I am waiting for YOU to give "the best" way cuz I have never seen "the best" in 71 years I live in this planet earth <bg>. And make sure no one else beats you with better way <bg>

Dedicated slide and negative scanners are probably the best way, and flatbeds with slide and negative scanning accessories are probably the next best.

The problem for the personal user with a dedicated slide and negative scanner is that once all of your slides and negatives are scanned and converted, the dedicated slide scanner is of no further use. And, they are expensive ranging up to $1,100. You have to divide the number of slides and negatives into the cost of the scanner to see if it’s cost effective compared to sending the slides and negatives out to a service.

The unit could be re-sold on eBay, but that can be a hassle and safely packing and shipping is no easy task.

That leaves the second-best method as the new "best". A flatbed with slide and negative accessories and a digital ICE program, combined with some Photoshop tweaking, can work out. The flatbed has further use as a regular scanner.

A little Googling will produce recommendations of scanners and techniques.

I don’t think he will need to go any further as he asks for "the best" and you give him "the best" <bg>. And that’s the problem I have with "the best"

In article ,
tony cooper wrote:

I see nothing wrong with asking for the best way. That’s taken to mean the easiest, the fastest, and the method that produces the best results. Sometimes those are conflicting goals, and sometimes the cost is a factor.

Dedicated slide and negative scanners are probably the best way, and flatbeds with slide and negative scanning accessories are probably the next best.

Actually, drum scanners are the best way. Dedicated film scanners are a distant second; consumer-grade flatbed scanners with transparency adapter gizmos just plain suck. 🙂

Drum scanners work by mounting the negative or transparency on a clear glass cylinder. The cylinder is spun at high speed, and a tiny, very powerful light moves down the center of the cylinder. Light shines through the spinning drum and is detected by a photomultiplier tube which passes over the outside surface of the drum.

Photomultiplier tubes are exquisitely sensitive; they can detect even a single photon of light. Drum scanners can easily record very fine, very subtle detail even in shadows.

Film scanners and flatbed scanners use charge-coupled devices (CCDs), not photomultiplier tubes. CCDs, which are the same light-sensing gizmos found in digital cameras, tend not to be as sensitive to light as PMTs. As a result, they have difficulty picking up subtle shadow detail, especially in dark negatives or underexposed transparencies. Even high-end, $45,000 flatbed scanners do not reproduce the same tonal range as a drum scanner, advertising hype of high-end flatbed vendors aside.

If you take a scan made by a very good film scanner and you compare it to a scan made by a drum scanner, the difference can be quite dramatic. The overall tonal range and the detail in the hilights and shadows of the scan made by the drum scanner is much, much better. Film scanners, especially cheap consumer-quality film scanners, tend to produce scans that are flat and muddy in the shadows.

Of course "best" tends to mean "money is no object." Drum scanners are the best scanners, period, but they’re also very, very pricey.

—
Photography, kink, polyamory, shareware, and more: all at http://www.xeromag.com/franklin.html

"tacit" wrote in message

In article ,
tony cooper wrote:

I see nothing wrong with asking for the best way. That’s taken to mean the easiest, the fastest, and the method that produces the best results. Sometimes those are conflicting goals, and sometimes the cost is a factor.

Dedicated slide and negative scanners are probably the best way, and flatbeds with slide and negative scanning accessories are probably the next best.

Actually, drum scanners are the best way. Dedicated film scanners are a distant second; consumer-grade flatbed scanners with transparency adapter gizmos just plain suck. 🙂

Drum scanners work by mounting the negative or transparency on a clear glass cylinder. The cylinder is spun at high speed, and a tiny, very powerful light moves down the center of the cylinder. Light shines through the spinning drum and is detected by a photomultiplier tube which passes over the outside surface of the drum.

Photomultiplier tubes are exquisitely sensitive; they can detect even a single photon of light. Drum scanners can easily record very fine, very subtle detail even in shadows.

Film scanners and flatbed scanners use charge-coupled devices (CCDs), not photomultiplier tubes. CCDs, which are the same light-sensing gizmos found in digital cameras, tend not to be as sensitive to light as PMTs. As a result, they have difficulty picking up subtle shadow detail, especially in dark negatives or underexposed transparencies. Even high-end, $45,000 flatbed scanners do not reproduce the same tonal range as a drum scanner, advertising hype of high-end flatbed vendors aside.
If you take a scan made by a very good film scanner and you compare it to a scan made by a drum scanner, the difference can be quite dramatic. The overall tonal range and the detail in the hilights and shadows of the scan made by the drum scanner is much, much better. Film scanners, especially cheap consumer-quality film scanners, tend to produce scans that are flat and muddy in the shadows.

Of course "best" tends to mean "money is no object." Drum scanners are the best scanners, period, but they’re also very, very pricey.
—
Photography, kink, polyamory, shareware, and more: all at http://www.xeromag.com/franklin.html

Tacit is correct that drum scans are best. However, he is incorrect about flatbed scanners with transparency adapters. While most are crap (more or less depending on your needs and goals). However the Epson V700 and V750 according to many reviews I have seen come very close to most dedicated film scanners. I have the V700 and I have used several dedicated film scanners and can’t see anything that makes me want a dedicated film scanner. The V700 does a fantastic job and the V750 with ability to do wet mounting similar to a drum scanner is even better.

Like with so many things buy a cheap flatbed with transparency adpater and you get crap. Buy a good one and you get a good one. The same is true of dedicated film scanners. Buy cheap and get crap, buy good and get good.

The Spider

—
If stupid was fruit, Washington D.C. would be an orchard!