Scanning Negs -VS- Photo CD

[Nearsighted]

Hi, I've got a cheap-o 1800 DPI Negative scanner I've been using for several years. I've recently started ordering the photo CD along with my negs (no prints) from my local drug store 1 hr. photo finisher. The neg scanner does an OK job but it's not a very clean method of getting a digital file and it's very time consuming. I'm happier just popping the $4.00 for the CD (36 exp.). I'm just lazy I guess. What is your method of getting film images to the computer?

 

[dostacos]

until I can get a bigger desk for my computer stuff I use my photo delveoper to do the CD

 

[Steve B]

Both

Both

When I shoot negative film I always have my local lab make me a CD and no prints. The files the lab makes aren't very big so if I want to make a larger print I'll scan the neg myself and print on my inkjet. This way I only have to scan the pics I want to print large and I don't have to figure out a way to file the prints from pics I don't like and I can send family and friends the smaller files if one is a nice pic but doesn't necessarily warrant being printed large.

 

[wrenhunter]

Timely post, I've been thinking about this. Currently I pay for the full monty: negs, prints, and CD from a local indie shop (Bromfield). The weird thing is the scans & prints can look pretty different, so I'm not sure that a CD only would tell me what's good.

For instance, with this shot the scan is OK, but in the print the water has a metallic shimmer that is not nearly as attractive in the scan.

 

[RayPA]

I recently upgraded scanners. One of the reasons for the upgrade was to do my own color scans. My 1 hr. lab had been doing my color scans (to CD) for a while, and doing a good job at it. However, I have noticed, during the rescanning of these same color negatives, that many of the rolls are scratched (by the lab). Also, it appears (and none of the lab jockeys can verify this) that the lab sharpens every scan. Aside from the cost savings, these are other things to consider. Although I think the scratching is occurring during the scanning process, I'll probably move to having the lab process-only my color film.


🙂





.

 

[w3rk5]

I live in Canada. I bring my colour film to ShoppersDrugMart and just have them develop and burn to CD. I always tell them to never touch anything up. I'm quite happy with their service. It cost $2.99 + taxes regardless of how many exposures per roll. Some ShoppersDrugMart charge more, and some tell me I have to order prints with it. It really gets tiring asking for their price list and pointing it out to them.

I bought a EPSON 3490 flatbed scanner hoping I can just get the negs developed. I've tried to scan some negs but I wasn't very impressed. I knew if I wanted real quality I should have saved some more $$$ for a dedicated film scanner, but I was just too impatient and on a tight budget. For what it's worth, it's good enough for the net. 🙂

 

[ch1]

A year ago I "popped" for a Nikon 5000D scanner.

I use it to scan all negs (or slides) into zero-compression RAW images (65mb).

I consider these to be my "archival" images which I can always "manipulate" via PS and "boil down" when needed to various levels of "compression" for posting on websites etc.

Your CD's are probably mid to hi-res JPEGs at around 4-6mb (i.e. very "compressed").

The more the compression, the less you have a "true" original image.

You figure the math 65mb versus 6mb.....

 

[amateriat]

When I got going with all this stuff around 1998-9, I went with the best stuff I could muster the cash for (used Nikon LS-10 film scanner, new Epson Stylus Photo 1200 printer, and a Yamaha CD burner for all the image files I knew I was going to generate). The gear has gotten better over the years, but the goal has been near-total control. This means that the lab, whether pro lab or the local Rite Aid (my local one has someone who knows her stuff, and they charge $2.50 to run my film through the processor - uncut, and, happily, unscratched), only processes the film. Instead of a Photo CD, I just lay the whole roll (cut into strips o' six, of course) onto my flatbed, scan it, and make an enlarged (usually 11x14", sometimes 13x19") contact sheet. Beats hell out of trying to make sinse of a tiny index print (and, depending on the particular roll, sometimes the contact sheet itself is almost suitable for framing!).


- Barrett

 

[Tom Diaz]

When I shoot negative film I always have my local lab make me a CD and no prints. The files the lab makes aren't very big so if I want to make a larger print I'll scan the neg myself and print on my inkjet. This way I only have to scan the pics I want to print large and I don't have to figure out a way to file the prints from pics I don't like and I can send family and friends the smaller files if one is a nice pic but doesn't necessarily warrant being printed large.

That's exactly what I do. For my best pictures and big prints, I use a desktop film scanner. For smaller prints and (more typically) projected screen shows, I use the CD scans (1000 dpi), which are fine for that purpose.

C-41 negative developing is ubiquitous and the CDs are nearly ubiquitous. It is the closest thing to the speed of a digital workflow, and you can still use your film equipment and have the choice of a lot of kinds of C-41 film. I do expect the film choices to drop off, of course.

I wish there were an equally fast and inexpensive workflow for E-6 slide film. Does anyone have suggestions about that: Drop off your E-6 film and get back a CD and developed slides real soon afterward? For a reasonable price?

 

[dmr]

I still regularly order the CD with processing. I agree that scanning is very time consuming and tedious. I'll scan something where I want to make a nice print or want to correct something that didn't scan well or even if I want to play around with an image.

Considering the time it takes to scan, the CD is a bargain.

I also have hundreds, possibly thousands of old negatives that I'm going thru and re-discovering and scanning.

 

[jlw]

A couple of months ago I got depressed with the amount of time it takes to scan several negs from a roll using my Canon FS4000 film scanner, and decided to try having a CD made at the time of development.

The results were so lousy compared to what I had been getting on my own that I gave up the idea. The scans were dirty, the contrast was excessive, highlight detail was clipped, etc. They probably would have been good enough for indexing, but I decided it's easier to make my own low-res scans for that purpose, then go back and rescan the good ones at higher resolution.

Of course your experience will vary depending both on your own demands and the quality of your processor's scans, but it just didn't cut it for me.

 

[ClaremontPhoto]

The CD quality I get varies so much that I'm scanning my own now.

One week the shop scans at 1200ppi and the next week they deny they can scan at anything higher than 300ppi, even though I printed them the manual page for their machine which says it will go up tp 4000ppi. And sometimes the CD is unreadable at all.

 

[aad]

I have a good shop that will scan for real at 3000 dpi, but you pay a good sum.

I get my E6 in a 2 hr turnaround, and pick the print-worthy shots off the light table, which is way better than any shop-scan. My prints from slides now look great.

Now that I do my own B&W developing, I'm pretty much E6 for color now.

 

[Nikon Bob]

Another Canuk here that uses Shoppers Drugmart to develope only with a CD. Locally the price is the same with or without CD, so I get the CD. I use the CD to view the photos and decide which I want to scan at home on my dedicated film scanner for printing large. I don't get many that I want to print large so the CD saves a lot of time and are good enough for sending on the web to friends. I like the option of being able to scan at home on a dedicated film scanner which helps give you full control over what the end product looks like. Some ugly scans on the CD have turned out well after being scanned at home and tweaked in PS Elements 2.0.

Nikon Bob

 

[T_om]

When I first bought my Nikon LS8000, my office was directly across the street from a local High School.

I contacted the student affairs office and asked if any students were looking for after-school part time employment. There were about 5 million or so. Perhaps I exaggerate a bit, but there was no shortage of kids wanting jobs..

Over a two year or so period, I had those students come in every afternoon and run the scanner. Only took a few minutes to train them and they sat in a room with a desk, scanner and computer and scanned away. I allowed them to do homework as long as the scanner was gronking away.

I got thousands and thousands of chromes and negatives scanned that way for very little cost. The students got the hang of it very quickly and although the turnover was pretty high, I never had a problem with any of them.

Tom

 

[Steve B]

I wish there were an equally fast and inexpensive workflow for E-6 slide film. Does anyone have suggestions about that: Drop off your E-6 film and get back a CD and developed slides real soon afterward? For a reasonable price?[/QUOTE]

I don't bother making an Index disc of my E6. I keep the slides in a hanging transparent file and find it almost easier to just drop the file sheet onto the light table than loading up a CD. Also I find slides a lot easier to view than negatives. The slides I like I'll scan and print/email/post, etc. I also find it easier to scan slides selectively as all the frames are seperated so one 4 slide tray in the scanner doesn't have to contain sequential frames, just the ones I like. And of course the files are then sorted by category and backed up to a disc and I'll make a note on the slide frame that I've got a digital file of the slide so that I don't accicently scan the same slide repeatedly. I try not to do too much more work than necessary.