lxmike
M2 fan.
Now I am on an incredibly low budget, can slides be scanned cheaply to a reasonably 'good' standard, or is it a very expensive business
best way, on a low budget, to scan 35mm 'slides'
- Thread starter lxmike
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 4
- Views 882
KM-25
Well-known
It can be a expensive as you want to spend, but cheap is another story....
Scanning is basically taking a digital photo of a small item that needs to be lit from behind. So in all reality, if your smart phone had no distortion and could focus that close, you could get a "Picture" of the slide, I have done that at times.
Now, of course the aspect of quality comes into play, do you want to text it to a friend to give him a laugh or make a high end 30x40 from it?
I use my D800 with a macro lens over a light table to do quick and dirty "scans" that actually come close to my sophisticated and dedicated Nikon 9000ED scanner for output that is smaller than say, 11x14, certainly enough to evaluate a shot or post it to the web. A lesser MP count camera would be more than adequate for most small prints and web as long as you use RAW. You could rent the D800 and a 60 macro from Lensrentals, borrow or improvise a small light table and be well on your way, just sort the slides by color cast, density and shoot them in a logical order. Make a mask to prevent flare by cutting an area the size of the film in a piece of black construction paper.
Other people use flatbed scanners like the one currently listed in the classifieds. When you want to obtain a digital representation of a piece of film, you are essentially taking the photo again with some limits, I wish I had a better answer for you but ultimately, your budget will dictate what you go for, if anything at all....
Scanning is basically taking a digital photo of a small item that needs to be lit from behind. So in all reality, if your smart phone had no distortion and could focus that close, you could get a "Picture" of the slide, I have done that at times.
Now, of course the aspect of quality comes into play, do you want to text it to a friend to give him a laugh or make a high end 30x40 from it?
I use my D800 with a macro lens over a light table to do quick and dirty "scans" that actually come close to my sophisticated and dedicated Nikon 9000ED scanner for output that is smaller than say, 11x14, certainly enough to evaluate a shot or post it to the web. A lesser MP count camera would be more than adequate for most small prints and web as long as you use RAW. You could rent the D800 and a 60 macro from Lensrentals, borrow or improvise a small light table and be well on your way, just sort the slides by color cast, density and shoot them in a logical order. Make a mask to prevent flare by cutting an area the size of the film in a piece of black construction paper.
Other people use flatbed scanners like the one currently listed in the classifieds. When you want to obtain a digital representation of a piece of film, you are essentially taking the photo again with some limits, I wish I had a better answer for you but ultimately, your budget will dictate what you go for, if anything at all....
De_Corday
Eternal Student
I digitize almost all of the B&W on my Flickr with my Panasonic Lumix and my bright white laptop screen. I rig the negative up on a black piece of foam-core with a roughly full-frame-size square cut in it. Negatives I keep tensioned by taping pencils along side the hole like little rollers, but with slide you should just be able to tape the slide. The limiting factor is the Lumix's 10mp and the lens' tendency towards vignetteing
KM-25
Well-known
OK...since my last post:
I just "Scanned" two frames of a roll of TMY 400 on my light table handheld with my D800 at ISO 800, converted the raws, inverted the images, minor toning, posted to this thread, pretty easy really and they would make great 8x12 prints....
Easy-peasy...
I just "Scanned" two frames of a roll of TMY 400 on my light table handheld with my D800 at ISO 800, converted the raws, inverted the images, minor toning, posted to this thread, pretty easy really and they would make great 8x12 prints....
Easy-peasy...
Colin Corneau
Colin Corneau
The best scans are a high-end dedicated film scanner - you just won't beat that.
Some businesses offer services with such scanners. It's worth what you pay.
For myself, I've used an L-series Canon 100mm macro lens to get 1:1 on a 5DMk3. I think any quality DSLR with an equivalent lens will do a terrific job...I just made a 16x20 print from my file...worth looking into.
Far as cheap goes, I'd say it's that. I've used an Epson v700 and it was OK but beyond 8x10 it's just not sharp...those flatbeds seem to work better the larger the negative size.
Some businesses offer services with such scanners. It's worth what you pay.
For myself, I've used an L-series Canon 100mm macro lens to get 1:1 on a 5DMk3. I think any quality DSLR with an equivalent lens will do a terrific job...I just made a 16x20 print from my file...worth looking into.
Far as cheap goes, I'd say it's that. I've used an Epson v700 and it was OK but beyond 8x10 it's just not sharp...those flatbeds seem to work better the larger the negative size.
