Film to jpeg...

baby and crumble

Ok, this might be a weird (and silly) question, but here goes.

You guys that shoot film... how do you get it so you can pp in photoshop/ stick stuff up online? Because I remember before when I used to get film developed and get it on cd the quality was AWFUL, and so I was just wondering, do you get it developed, then scan it, or is there a place that do top quality 'conversions' for want of a better word to jpeg?

And a related question, if i were to develop my own film so i have negatives (trying to get myself to one of the college soc classes in this!) could I go straight from negs to jpeg, or is that the stupidest question ever?



Zo

DaireQuinlan

do a forum search for 'film scanners' for one or two threads on the subject. Some people here get them scanned in minilabs, with a sufficiently interested and professional minilab operator the results can be quite satisfactory.

Morrisseeee

I was in the same predicament not so long ago, so what I did was bring my film to the photo shop, ask them to develop it and scan the negatives and put them onto a CD, they were scanned @ 1840*1232 pixels (or similar) @ 72DPI in JPEG form. So I just opened my editing software and from there edited the desired film JPG. The quality wasn't too bad, say for printing later at 6*4 or 7*5 etc.
A friend of mine has a dedicated film scanner which I used recently, but it takes a long time (and plenty of patience/practice) to figure out the best scanning options, but basically it can be scanned in at high resolutions and these lead to LARGE files, ie. JPG's, TIFF's, etc. The biggest issue/bugbear with scanning in negatives is dust/scratches etc.

Rb

DaireQuinlan wrote: »

do a forum search for 'film scanners' for one or two threads on the subject. Some people here get them scanned in minilabs, with a sufficiently interested and professional minilab operator the results can be quite satisfactory.

Indeed.

Minilabs can work out quite expensive too. We use an Epson V700 in work which gives fantastic results, it's an expensive scanner but if you were going to be using it a lot now and in the future it would pay itself off. It would also allow you to control the quality yourself.

Unfortunately most minilab employees don't have an interest in photography and as a consequence quality can vary hugely depending on where you go.

Nisio

I'm planning on getting my negs scanned in the local unicare pharmacy; they reckon 3 films per cd and 5 euro per cd. I've yet to do it so I can't confirm that price...

Here's one I got back from their minilab scanner:
http://pix.ie/oising/1212296/size/1200
http://pix.ie/oising/1463334/size/800

Zillah

Film scanners are pretty damn cool. We used them all the time in college. You basically load your film into a plastic grid and slot that into the scanner and it takes high resolution scans straight from the film. Works no problem once you get the settings right. Do an initial rough scan of all of them, then review them and pick which ones to take the time to scan thoroughly.

Of course if you're going to invest any significant amount of money in it I'd recommend just buying a DSLR and skip all this film/processing/scanning nonsense.

DaireQuinlan

Zillah wrote: »

Of course if you're going to invest any significant amount of money in it I'd recommend just buying a DSLR and skip all this film/processing/scanning nonsense.

:eek:

Kintarō Hattori

Zillah wrote: »

Of course if you're going to invest any significant amount of money in it I'd recommend just buying a DSLR and skip all this film/processing/scanning nonsense.

You heathen!!! I've gone from a DSLR to an old rangefinder because I like the style film produces. :eek:



Still using the DSLR so tis the best of both worlds.

KarmaGarda

Zillah wrote: »

Film scanners are pretty damn cool. We used them all the time in college. You basically load your film into a plastic grid and slot that into the scanner and it takes high resolution scans straight from the film. Works no problem once you get the settings right. Do an initial rough scan of all of them, then review them and pick which ones to take the time to scan thoroughly.

Of course if you're going to invest any significant amount of money in it I'd recommend just buying a DSLR and skip all this film/processing/scanning nonsense.

WHA! Who let you in here!

I have an epson V700. It's awesome. Scans negatives straight to jpeg at up to 12800 dpi. But not cheap at approx €500 (maybe €600 in some places).

sineadw

I was up in Rua Red in Tallaght today. They have a multimedia room with scanners that you can hire for 2.50 an hour (there are cheaper rates for longer times - can't remember now...). Don't quote me on this, but I've been told they're hasselblad machines. For that you could get a neg only process done (or DIY) and scan your negs to whatever res you wanted...

Effects

Nisio wrote: »

I'm planning on getting my negs scanned in the local unicare pharmacy; they reckon 3 films per cd and 5 euro per cd. I've yet to do it so I can't confirm that price...

Unicare in Artaine develop and put 5 rolls of 36exp onto CD for €15.

baby and crumble

Hey thanks for all the replies guys...

Originally Posted by Zillah
Of course if you're going to invest any significant amount of money in it I'd recommend just buying a DSLR and skip all this film/processing/scanning nonsense.

Indeed, :eek:

I use a DSLR, but I like the idea of experimenting with film, and seeing how things work... Plus I reckon thinking about the cost will make me really think about how I'm composing stuff and what I'm shooting... that's the hope at least!!!

Sleepy

sineadw wrote: »

I was up in Rua Red in Tallaght today. They have a multimedia room with scanners that you can hire for 2.50 an hour (there are cheaper rates for longer times - can't remember now...). Don't quote me on this, but I've been told they're hasselblad machines. For that you could get a neg only process done (or DIY) and scan your negs to whatever res you wanted...

Runs off to google rua red...

That sounds brilliant!

sineadw

Sleepy wrote: »

Runs off to google rua red...

That sounds brilliant!

I know! Was nearly going to keep it secret, just in case

cnocbui

I use a film scanner - a Polaroid sprintscan 4000. It scans 35mm negs or slides and you end up with great scans. Vuescan software oversees the scanning and converts negatives to a positive image. Slides get scanned to a positive image also.

The results you get with a decent film scanner can be superb, but there is often a bit of work involved editing dust and adjusting the scans.

If you wanted to look at film scanners, I would seriously suggest looking at a Canon Pixma MP990 multifunction printer/scanner/copier.

http://www.canon.co.uk/For_Home/Product_Finder/Multifunctionals/Inkjet/PIXMA_MP990/index.asp

DaireQuinlan

cnocbui wrote: »

If you wanted to look at film scanners, I would seriously suggest looking at a Canon Pixma MP990 multifunction printer/scanner/copier.

http://www.canon.co.uk/For_Home/Product_Finder/Multifunctionals/Inkjet/PIXMA_MP990/index.asp

I normally advise people to steer clear of those multifunction devices. Much more complex, more things to go wrong. In some cases if one bit breaks the entire thing is useless (one model a friend of mine has won't scan if the printer is out of ink for example ). Plus it's probably two substandard components bolted together. You're better off buying seperately.

cnocbui

DaireQuinlan wrote: »

I normally advise people to steer clear of those multifunction devices. Much more complex, more things to go wrong. In some cases if one bit breaks the entire thing is useless (one model a friend of mine has won't scan if the printer is out of ink for example ). Plus it's probably two substandard components bolted together. You're better off buying seperately.

You are wrong on every count. If you would care to read thorough reviews of that device you would find that it does everything it is supposed to, very, very well, including printing B&W.

I have a several generations earlier model MP600 and it has been probably the most faultless and brilliant computer peripheral I have ever owned. Never so much as a single clogged nozzle, even after sometimes months of not being used. Does an excellent job of both scanning, printing and copying. It is simple to operate and cheap to run.

You are shooting ignorance bullets from the hip.

Incidentally, the scan quality is excellent. The MP990 is one of only a handful of multifunction printers that has a scanner lock built in, an indication that Canon designed the scanner to be as good as a stand-alone device and not an integrated afterthought.

Based upon Canon's projections of ink-cartridge yields, we estimate that the MP990's cost per page breaks down to 4.7 cents per page for monochrome text, which is average to slightly above average for printers in its class. Color comes in at 13.6 cents per page, somewhat less expensive than many other competing AIOs.

With a bevy of improvements and innovations, as well as easier installation and better-than-ever text and photo quality, the Canon Pixma MP990 is top of its class.

http://computershopper.com/printers/reviews/canon-pixma-mp990-wireless-photo-all-in-one-printer

And before you say you can't trust such a review, have a look at the opinions of photography enthusiasts who own and use one: http://search.dpreview.com/?q=mp990

DaireQuinlan

cnocbui wrote: »

http://computershopper.com/printers/reviews/canon-pixma-mp990-wireless-photo-all-in-one-printer

And before you say you can't trust such a review, have a look at the opinions of photography enthusiasts who own and use one: http://search.dpreview.com/?q=mp990

I would indeed say that I wouldn't be bothered reading a review from computershopper. And the plural of anecdote is not data

Nisio

Can it scan negatives? ( couldn't find it in the reviews)

kumate_champ07

I scan to Tiff, you end up with a film 'Raw' file that way.
Takes around 2 mins a frame but the quality is worth it. a preview image takes 5 seconds for each frame before I decide which is worth using.

canon 8800F or epson 4490 are good choices for budget film scanners

cnocbui

Nisio wrote: »

Can it scan negatives? ( couldn't find it in the reviews)

Yes it can.

DaireQuinlan wrote: »

I would indeed say that I wouldn't be bothered reading a review from computershopper. And the plural of anecdote is not data

So, to sum up: You hold a strong opinion about a class of product you don't own and have never used, you are happy to quote anecdotal evidence yourself, but then say anecdotal evidence is worthless. You then snootily state you couldn't be bothered reading a very thorough review, obviously valuing your own ignorance more highly.


I should also have mentioned that even your own anecdote was misleading as my device has no problem scanning when out of ink. I can even tell it to print just using black ink if one of the colours is out.

Since the computershopper review was not good enough for your standards, here are a couple of others:

At that kind of price point, specification is only part of the equation, as performance has to be up to scratch as

well. Happily, the MP990 is more than capable in this area. Our suite of tests provided nothing that it couldn't handle, and it produced speed and quality worth every penny.
...
There's no denying that the Canon MP990 performs very, very well. It's fast and produces excellent-quality results. Not only that, but the specification is impressive. Even at its list price of £329 the Pixma MP990 is worth every penny, as it's not going to disappoint in terms of output or speeds. At the street price of about £230, it's excellent value. If you're after the best possible all-in-one inkjet, then this may well be it.

http://www.macuser.co.uk/reviews/273694/canon-pixma-mp990.html

The Canon PIXMA MP990's speed is marginally better than its predecessor's, though it's not the best printer if you're in a hurry.

Print quality is fantastic overall. Text characters are sharp and accurate across all tested font sizes, while colours are vibrant in document graphics though aren't always solid. Photos suffer no notable colour inaccuracies or aberrations. Like the Canon PIXMA Pro9000 Mark II, we achieved deeper blacks in black and white photos when printing with full colour consumables rather than using the greyscale setting.

http://www.pcworld.idg.com.au/review/printers_scanners/canon/pixma_mp990/327792

Photo images remain among the best we've seen from five or six-ink machines. Colour transitions are smooth, tones are natural and there's plenty of detail in darker as well as lighter areas of images. We printed a couple of black and white photos and mid-range shades are a definite improvement over printers relying on black ink alone. Grey neutrality is good throughout the range and without going to eight or nine-colour machines, is probably the best you'll see.

http://www.trustedreviews.com/printers/review/2009/12/22/Canon-PIXMA-MP990---All-in-One-Inkjet-Printer/p1

The reason I quoted the computershopper review originally, was because they were the only reviewrs I could find who tested the scanning functions thoroughly.

I found several other reviews and they all gave it 4.5 stars out of 5. Testfreaks scored it 9.8 out of 10

Freddie59

kumate_champ07 wrote: »

I scan to Tiff, you end up with a film 'Raw' file that way.
Takes around 2 mins a frame but the quality is worth it. a preview image takes 5 seconds for each frame before I decide which is worth using.

canon 8800F or epson 4490 are good choices for budget film scanners

+1 to that. Just started using a Canoscan 8800f. Scanning in old P&S Canon negatives from 20 years ago. The quality is great, given the camera involved.