Home  
Site Partners: SpotterGuides Veloce Books  
Related Sites: Your Link Here  

Go Back   TenTenths Motorsport Forum > Racing Talk > Motorsport Art & Photography

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 21 Feb 2003, 12:18 (Ref:513334)   #1
woodyracing
Veteran
 
woodyracing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
United Kingdom
uk
Posts: 2,204
woodyracing should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
photography - scanning negatives

anyone have any experience of scanning 35mm negatives on a home/office type scanner ?

Im looking at the Epson 1260u Photo which includes a "transparency unit".

is scanning negatives like this going to give better results than scanning a photo ?

does it also mean that i could open up a used 35mm film cartridge and just use the negatives, cutting out the development costs?

thanks.
Woody
woodyracing is offline  
Quote
Old 21 Feb 2003, 12:32 (Ref:513343)   #2
bella
Race Official
Veteran
 
bella's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
France
Posts: 16,760
bella is the undisputed Champion of the World!bella is the undisputed Champion of the World!bella is the undisputed Champion of the World!bella is the undisputed Champion of the World!bella is the undisputed Champion of the World!bella is the undisputed Champion of the World!bella is the undisputed Champion of the World!bella is the undisputed Champion of the World!bella is the undisputed Champion of the World!bella is the undisputed Champion of the World!bella is the undisputed Champion of the World!
no, you'd still have to have it processed.

i've got a negative scanner on my scanner back at my parents and it's naff, scanning in the pictures i found gave a much better result. think it's an epson too.
bella is offline  
__________________
devils advocate in-chief and professional arguer of both sides
Quote
Old 21 Feb 2003, 12:48 (Ref:513354)   #3
kdr
Veteran
 
kdr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,741
kdr should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridkdr should be qualifying in the top 5 on the grid
look for an old nikon coolscan as people move towards digital.
kdr is offline  
__________________
I want you to drive flat out
Quote
Old 21 Feb 2003, 13:24 (Ref:513390)   #4
ss_collins
Veteran
 
ss_collins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Nigeria
Mooresville, NC
Posts: 6,704
ss_collins should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridss_collins should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridss_collins should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridss_collins should be qualifying in the top 3 on the grid
I've got an epson 2450 phot and scanning negs gives better quality than prints.
ss_collins is offline  
__________________
Chase the horizon
Quote
Old 21 Feb 2003, 14:06 (Ref:513420)   #5
woodyracing
Veteran
 
woodyracing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
United Kingdom
uk
Posts: 2,204
woodyracing should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
would i still need to get them processed/developed though?
if so what do they do to them?
woodyracing is offline  
Quote
Old 21 Feb 2003, 15:01 (Ref:513459)   #6
ss_collins
Veteran
 
ss_collins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Nigeria
Mooresville, NC
Posts: 6,704
ss_collins should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridss_collins should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridss_collins should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridss_collins should be qualifying in the top 3 on the grid
they put them through a load of chemicals (probably c-41) and the neg can be used willy nilly after that, its quite tricky and a fair skill to do yourself as you have to remove the film from the canister in total (and I mean total) darkness and place inside another jobbie. and put in the right chemicals at exactly the correct temperature for the correct time.
its cheaper and easier to take your 35mm to jessops or the like. get some little prints done and then neg scan the good ones.
ss_collins is offline  
__________________
Chase the horizon
Quote
Old 21 Feb 2003, 15:46 (Ref:513486)   #7
brickkicker
Veteran
 
brickkicker's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location:
on earth somewere in the Midlands
Posts: 1,074
brickkicker should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
If you want to save some money try using slide film. If you want to scan negs id try and get a cheap slide/neg scanner.
brickkicker is offline  
Quote
Old 21 Feb 2003, 18:32 (Ref:513597)   #8
redshoes
Veteran
 
redshoes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Posts: 8,881
redshoes is going for a new world record!redshoes is going for a new world record!redshoes is going for a new world record!redshoes is going for a new world record!redshoes is going for a new world record!redshoes is going for a new world record!redshoes is going for a new world record!
If you're talking about a transparency adapter on a flatbed scanner then I wouldn't recomend it. A dedicated neg/slide scanner on the other hand is completely different. I've been using a Canon unit for the last 2 years and am still impressed with the results.

Ad kdr said you might be able to pick up a cheap(ish) second hand unit. Look for Nikon Coolscan or Canon if possible. Haven't checked prices recently but new you are looking at around £500 for something decent.
redshoes is offline  
Quote
Old 21 Feb 2003, 19:25 (Ref:513617)   #9
Elio
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location:
Nr Maidstone, Kent
Posts: 797
Elio should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
I bought a Nikon Coolscan IV ED in the summer of last year (Dabs.com usually have the best prices on the `net). Very good results - I scan my 35mm obtaining a file size of 4000x2600 pixels, that easily beats the resolution that my 5 megapixel digital camera can manage - 2560x1920 pixels.

Haven`t made many reprints/enlargements from my scans but when I have they generally look better than the orginal prints. The Nikon has various enhancement features built-in - eg. colour re-inhancement for faded negs, the ability to remove scratches and to reduce grain if your`e scanning from, say 400 or 800ISO film.

Simply burn files to cd and then nip into Jessops if you want anything printed on pukka photographic paper.
Elio is offline  
Quote
Old 21 Feb 2003, 23:07 (Ref:513770)   #10
woodyracing
Veteran
 
woodyracing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
United Kingdom
uk
Posts: 2,204
woodyracing should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
thanks, I didnt even know about those dedicated film scanners, they look the business.
woodyracing is offline  
Quote
Old 22 Feb 2003, 10:38 (Ref:514040)   #11
Carrie
Veteran
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location:
Cheshire, England
Posts: 2,685
Carrie should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridCarrie should be qualifying in the top 5 on the grid
Yeah, we've got a rather snazzy UMAX scanner at work. When we bought it, it was heading towards top of the range as far as scanners were concerned, but is now probably pretty outdated.
It one of those where the lid can be replaced with a full size transparency adapter. That produces very good results from colour transparencies, but the results with negatives can be very hit and miss. Sometimes they'll scan great, other times the colours will be so out that it's impossible to get an image that looks anything like it should.
Carrie is offline  
Quote
Old 2 Mar 2003, 19:28 (Ref:522601)   #12
Zandbak
Racer
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Netherlands
Posts: 238
Zandbak should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
I work with a Primefilm 1800I, check for the quality my pics from "Beru Top 10" and above...........

Pictures are taken with a Canon EOS 30 body and "black" Canon objectives
Zandbak is offline  
Quote
Old 3 Mar 2003, 06:46 (Ref:523194)   #13
Red
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Romania
Bucharest, Romania
Posts: 5,867
Red should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Re: photography - scanning negatives

Quote:
Originally posted by woodyracing
is scanning negatives like this going to give better results than scanning a photo ?
Yes, definitelly. Every film has an inherent granularity, but when you scan photo's you scan the granularity of the photo-paper as well.

PS: A film scanner (not the most professional though, something like 2400-2700 dpi optical) is not very unaffordable, it's in the US$ 200-300 range (in my area).
Red is offline  
Quote
Old 11 Mar 2003, 14:37 (Ref:532711)   #14
F1Nut
Rookie
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location:
UK
Posts: 38
F1Nut should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Its always best to scan the negative but only if you have a good scanner if not the print is better.

Try using a 100 asa film which I know is slow but you will not get the grain like on a 400 asa film.

Steve.
F1Nut is offline  
Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
POSITIVE CASTOR-are there no negatives? johnny yuma Racing Technology 8 25 Mar 2006 21:43
Bulk scanning of negatives? Kelvin Motorsport Art & Photography 2 6 Dec 2005 13:17
Scanning photos Allen Mead Motorsport Art & Photography 11 4 Apr 2005 15:10
Cleaning negatives and slides Stephen H Motorsport Art & Photography 11 30 Sep 2003 16:28
Scanning negatives pauldavid Motorsport Art & Photography 2 2 Mar 2003 23:25


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:37.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Original Website Copyright © 1998-2003 Craig Antil. All Rights Reserved.
Ten-Tenths Motorsport Forums Copyright © 2004-2021 Royalridge Computing. All Rights Reserved.
Ten-Tenths Motorsport Forums Copyright © 2021-2022 Grant MacDonald. All Rights Reserved.