Scanning Method - Prints or Negs?

[Laurence]

I normally scan slides with my flatbed, with decent results.

But, I have a question regarding the scanning of print film. I've read various posts on here, and have seen examples of scanning, both from the print and from the negative.

I've tried to scan negatives, and had "sort of" good luck, but I must say it's been "easier" to scan the prints.

In deference to my own laziness, I haven't really taken the time to tweak things for the negatives, though. My time seems to be at such a premium these days, that I've gone the "easier" route for my "lazy scans" of the prints.

Am I missing a lot by not taking the time to crank out a scan from the negative? Or, is it probably "almost as good" to just scan the prints?

I'd like to hear your thoughts, and your methods.

Larry

 

[gullevek]

Negatives are negatives. You get the "true" original. a developed Photo is just a reflection. For example, if I let my film develop in the small shop near my place, the photos are color poppy and very high contrast. But the film itself has the original typical toncal colors of the Film. I seriously would discourage from scannen photos unless you have no other choice.

But it also depends if you have a scanner that can scan negatives without problem. I own an Epson one and that does it very nice. I get really great results.

 

[lubitel]

it all depends on your scanner. mine does relatively poor with negs, so i usually scan prints. if i had a nice dedicated filmscanner, i would rather scan negatives.

 

[Jamie123]

I wouldn't say that you get the "true" negative when scanning your negs. Depending on the scannersoftware and film profile used the results can vary quite a bit. You do, however, control the results yourself. Most people like to do a low contrast scan with as many shadow and highlight details as possible and then tweak the file in photoshop. When you scan from a print you will get exactly what is on there which is much less "information" than there is on a negative.

 

[gullevek]

it all depends on your scanner. mine does relatively poor with negs, so i usually scan prints. if i had a nice dedicated filmscanner, i would rather scan negatives.

My Scanner can do both. I take out the reflective board and I put in the negatives in nice holders - up to 4 strips at once - and it scans them.

Software is very nice, low profile, perfect to keep shadows and highlights alive. I definitly prefer that over the prints I get from my photo stuido where I let my film develop.

 

[Pherdinand]

With the negative you have the option to look deeper into the shadows by scanning with the correct settings.
Once the image is printed on paper, what's outside of the tonal range of the paper you can never scan it. Also, if you want as higher resolution scan, you either need a large print or you should scan the film.

For quick web-display, scanning a good quality "easy" print (meaning an average scene with not too important shadow details) is a good alternative. I did that for years, and with some PS aftermatch one can get good results.
This is valid for 35mm. For my 6x6 negative frames, i get infinitely better results by scanning the negative than a tiny print, and I can crop the hell out of the frame still getting useable resolution.

There's a second reason why i bought a good flatbed able to scan negatives too: Having the film developed and properly printed, even in 10x15cm, costs nowadays more and more, and since a large percentage of the frames are well below my expectations, i just ditch them, so makes more sense to invest in a good scanner and print only what's good enough.

 

[Creagerj]

Go with the negs. Smaller file size, and more accurate representation of the original picture. Also if you develop only you save a buck or two.

 

[femto]

My Scanner can do both. I take out the reflective board and I put in the negatives in nice holders - up to 4 strips at once - and it scans them..

Gullevek,

which scanner do you use?

you didn't mention the name and I'm interested in buying a decent one!

~HD

 

[Laurence]

Gullevek,

which scanner do you use?

you didn't mention the name and I'm interested in buying a decent one!

~HD

femto --- it could be one of the Epson brands. I have the 2450, and it has the "illumination light" on the underside of the lid. This is used by pulling the foam reflector out of its holder on the underside of the lid. Then, when you scan negs/prints/transparencies that "illumination light" is activated so that there is evenly distributed lighting on the film to be scanned. The usual "traveling" scan light down in the unit then does its thing.

Interestingly, I've seen scans from the newer Epsons, and I actually don't think they are all that much better, if at all, than my older 2450.

The 2450 can be had for a relative "song" these days...$75-$100 on the auction site.

 

[StuartR]

If you are using a flatbed it probably doesn't matter too much, but scanning negatives is better as long as your scanner can handle it. What do you want these for...just for the web? If you are just scanning for the web, and are not too fussy, then just scan the prints. The negatives will give you greater dynamic range, and potentially much higher resultion if you scanner can deliver it.

 

[chrish]

i scan negatives because i dont know how to make prints. my grandpa has an enlarger in his basement but ive never asked or tried.

 

[Justin Low]

i scan negatives because i dont know how to make prints. my grandpa has an enlarger in his basement but ive never asked or tried.

Do give printing a try when you have the time. It's not hard to start, especially if you already have the equipment needed.

 

[rogue_designer]

It depends on your purpose in scanning. If you are still going to be printing in the darkroom, and the scans are for your website - they should be representative of your prints.

Especially if the printing is a large part of your art and you use specific techniques to interpret the negative.

If - however - you are going to be printing digitally for your final output anyway, I would say it's probably better to scan the negative, and control your printing via your image editor.

But it all depends.