Digitizing Slides
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: But will MS's overheat in the sun, like the Crapple iPad?
Next: Turn To Stone With The 24/1.4G!!
From: Bruce on 2 Aug 2010 13:44 On Mon, 02 Aug 2010 09:57:54 -0500, Ryan McGinnis <digicana(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >It'd take even longer if you had to do it at home with a Nikon Coolscan >or somesuch. (They produce marginally better scans, but take around a >minute or two per scanned image at the best settings.) Marginally better scans? Don't be ridiculous, the scans from a Nikon Coolscan are significantly better, with much higher dynamic range as well as greater resolution. Until recently, the best way to proceed would have been to buy a good quality scanner, digitise the slides yourself then sell the scanner on eBay. Unfortunately, used prices for Nikon Coolscan scanners have gone through the roof since production of the 35mm scanners ended, so the economics of doing it yourself are no longer quite so predictable. There are very cheap scanners available but the results are poor. Probably the best compromise would be to buy something like a Plustek OpticFilm 7600i which has good resolution and reasonably good dynamic range. It is relatuvely easy to use and doesn't cost a fortune - a new 7600i is a fraction of the cost of a used Nikon Coolscan V. The output quality is good, and more than adequate for all but the most critical user. Here's a review: http://www.imaging-resource.com/SCAN/PLTK7600/7600.HTM
From: Skylamar Jones on 2 Aug 2010 15:42 I just want to thank everyone who provided me with advice in this thread. I'm going to look at the web sites that were suggested. It sounds like, though, that my mom should take the most important slides to Costco. However, I hope that doesn't mean she won't keep the other slides. I would take the slides from her but apartment is much smaller than her house. Thanks again. Sky
From: -hh on 2 Aug 2010 17:02 Skylamar Jones <skyla...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > I just want to thank everyone who provided me with advice in this > thread. I'm going to look at the web sites that were suggested. I've read through the posts and fairly recently, had to do a fairly similar 'purge', from which I'm going to offer a perhaps radical suggestions. This partly emphasizes what ray observed: "TANSTAAFL (There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch) applies here." The simple bottom line to this is that you can do some stuff that's pretty fast/easy, but will result in moderately low optical performance. However, it is very much worth noting there's more to a photo than just the photo. There's also its context. For example, *who* is in a photo, *where* was it taken, *when* and so forth. The "Lessons Learned" in my case is that we have a literal box full of 19th Century tin photos of family ancestors ... but the box has almost zero written notes on anything to give us any clues, and there's no longer anyone alive anymore who knows who is who. So while we have 'preserved' photos (although not yet digitized), nearly all of their context has been lost, because that part was never written down. To this end, I'm going to suggest a multi-parter: Part I: "Family Slide Show" (for lack of a better description) 1) One fast/easy way to get basic copies is to set up your slide projector and screen, with your existing digital camera equipment on a tripod right next to it. Center & adjust on the screen that you're projecting your slides onto, advance the slide, take a photo. Advance, photo. Repeat until done. The results won't be super- sharp, but do keep in mind that this is where TANSTAAFL applies. 2) But before embarking on the above, consider the above setup, and what happens if we change from a still digital camera to a video camera. Sit down with Mom (& other familymembers) and display the images and as each image comes up, talk about them. **Yes, make sure that you're recording the audio properly**. The objective here is to quickly/easily add _context_ information to the images. Part II: Culling for High Rez By now you should have some insight by which you have a better idea what your 'keepers' are that merit a better resolution digital still being made of them. And as importantly, you've also learned more about them - why these are the important ones - and have already digitally captured that data for future use via the video. What was previously a hard task to begin has probably become a lot easier, because you've probably done well by zeroing in on the most important 5%. Part III: Reproduction You can eventually made a DVD video montage, both for Mom as well as other familymembers. Perhaps one of the voice-to-text programs can be used to automate the capturing of the annotations? In the meantime, you at least have the raw digital video that can be duped. Hope this helps, -hh
From: Frank ess on 2 Aug 2010 17:11 Jon Smid wrote: > Skylamar Jones schreef: >> Hi. I'm new to this group so I don't know if someone posted a >> similar question recently. >> >> My mom has 3000 slides taken by my dad, who has passed away. >> Because of the space the slides take up in her home, my mom is >> weeding through them, looking at them manually using a slide >> projector. She isn't that computer savvy but she told me that >> Costco charges >> 29 cents per slide for digitizing them. For 3000 slides that's >> $870 which is more than my mom wants to spend. >> >> I'm just wondering if anyone has any suggestions for other ideas >> for digitizing slides such as using a company that's >> cheaper/better than Costco or a buying/renting good scanner that >> my mom can use at home. Thanks, >> >> Sky > > I did get /acceptable/ results (certainly for family purposes) by > using a dia duplicator onto an EOS400D. Shooting goes extremely > fast (say 10 per minute or so) while the only parameter I monitored > was the histogram (now and then compensating up to +/-1 stop). > > Afterwards I ran the *raws* through a program to process with : > - automatic whitebalance > - autoleveling > That was done of course fully automatic. Chances are the flatbed scanners or the duplicator on a camera will produce satisfactory results if they are for family archives and print albums. The viewing by subsequent generations will likely require prints, at any rate, as mentioned by others. My slides are mostly junk, but the scenes are of a nature where pixel-peeping can pay off, so I do some pretty big scans on some of them. If you like that alternative, the dedicated slide scanner is likely a must. I got burned out on sorting and scanning both, a couple of years ago (OK, more like five), but the slides keep well, and if my interest is ever rejuvenated, I'm equipped to take care of it. http://www.flickr.com/photos/fyougitive/48307637/in/set-826244/ I have said, and repeated, the best solution is to spend a few hours training a volunteer intern, and turn him/her loose on the archive. Just have those big DVDs and/or external drives ready. -- Frank ess
From: Michael on 2 Aug 2010 18:56
On 2010-08-02 03:46:34 -0400, Paul Heslop said: > Skylamar Jones wrote: >> >> Hi. I'm new to this group so I don't know if someone posted a similar >> question recently. >> >> My mom has 3000 slides taken by my dad, who has passed away. Because of >> the space the slides take up in her home, my mom is weeding through >> them, looking at them manually using a slide projector. >> >> She isn't that computer savvy but she told me that Costco charges 29 >> cents per slide for digitizing them. For 3000 slides that's $870 which >> is more than my mom wants to spend. >> >> I'm just wondering if anyone has any suggestions for other ideas for >> digitizing slides such as using a company that's cheaper/better than >> Costco or a buying/renting good scanner that my mom can use at home. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Sky > > does your mom have a computer etc? or is it feasible to put them onto > dvd discs or something like that for her? I don't know about prices > in america but I am sure the cost of slide scanners is coming down. > certainly you should be able to get a reasonable one for a lot cheaper > than the money you mentioned it would cost to have it done > professionally. having sid that many of the reviews I have read don't > make them sound exactly great. another option is the scanner with > slide facility, this one seems to have a good standing > Canoscan 5600F Film and Slide Scanner Sadly, the price of slide scanners is only going up, for the good ones. I picked up a midrange Pacific Imaging scanner on ebay for well under $100 but if you want the GOOD scanners: the Nikon V, Nikon 5000 or Nikon 9000 you will pay well over a thousand dollars. The 9000 sells new for about $2200 WHEN you can get one and I've seen them for 50% MORE than that used on ebay. If you want quality you have to use a good dedicated film scanner. Drum scanners are best but many thousands so for "consumer prices" the Nikons are your best alternative. Remember, once you scan them, that's the image you keep. The super hi res that was the slide will presumably be retired forever. The upside is, you can invest $2K in a 9000, do your scanning, and sell it for about what you paid for it on ebay. -- Michael |