Why do you scan?

[dave lackey]

This is a curiosity question and it is really a two-part question.

1. For you hobbyists: Why do you scan your film negatives/slides? And, do you print anything, either 4x6, 5x7 or larger?

2. For you professionals: Why do you scan your film negatives/slides? Is it necessary for technical reasons or is it for some other reasons like sharing on the forums?

I find the scanning thing somewhat odd.

Personally, for me, I scan some snapshots to share with the family, knowing that they may last a few minutes or a year or so before they are deleted, lost, forgotten or corrupted by a bad hard drive or whatever. It is doubtful that they will survive very long at all....I keep the negatives and any post-processed originals backed up. Any scans for snapshots are cheaply done and rarely are larger than 1 mb.

Professionally, I am currently doing photographic documentaries in book form. Currently, I am using a DIY publisher on-line and in order to do that, of course, I get scans from Precision Camera and they do a very good job with 26mb scans. It is more costly, but I figure that into the cost of the project just as the cost of film and developing. I do not share any professional work on-line. I keep all of that separate from forums and anyone else not professional connected to my images. All negatives and scans are kept in a secure place.

So, I don't have a scanner and do not plan to buy one any time soon though that may change as I don't know how my market will evolve over the next few years.

Just wondering why people feel the need to scan everything just as I wonder why people spray and pray tens of thousand of digital images when very few are all that is required. Also wonder why the average hobbyist doesn't think about the importance of a hard bound photo album to hand down to family or friends in the future.:angel:

 

[paulfish4570]

i scan to share, for 4x6 prints at a lab, and to edit my black and white work ...

 

[bananasplit]

I scan my neg all formats not because I like sitting in front of a computer for hours... just because I do not have a dark room any more.
If you ask I will not go to a pro lab for something I can do from my desk.

I print all formats as much as my printer allows me to do so.

Finally I miss the dark room (the fun of it) but technically I found a way keep control on the entire process. Of course I could switch to digital but this is an other topic.

 

[kmallick]

I occasionally wet print both 35mm and 6x7s. But I still scan the B&W negatives before I wet print to judge which ones are worth printing and also to adjust, crop and digitally file it. I also like to scan the 6x7 chromes and color negatives for sharing online.

 

[Dr Gaspar]

As a hobbyst, I scan every roll, but... I take my time with every photo, every roll, so it's not like I'm scanning 10 rolls a week. That's why it doesn't bother me to scan all my work.

I do it to show my friends, girlfriend and family. If I really like one of the photos, I print it in 10x10.

 

[Mcary]

I scan my neg all formats not because I like sitting in front of a computer for hours... just because I do not have a dark room any more.
If you ask I will not go to a pro lab for something I can do from my desk.

I print all formats as much as my printer allows me to do so.

Finally I miss the dark room (the fun of it) but technically I found a way keep control on the entire process. Of course I could switch to digital but this is an other topic.

+1
Don't really find scanning and the required post processing that big of a deal as I work at my own pace something spending hours and hours scanning and edit and other times just 15 minutes here and there. As far as prints go I generally send my files out to Adorama to have them printed on 10x13 sheets of Ilford Digital B&W paper.

 

[dave lackey]

Although I have a complete B&W darkroom (currently in boxes), I just don't have the time and room to set it up again right now. Not to mention the time to dedicate to locking myself in the darkroom and going to town - as much as I'd like to (trust me on this).

I already shoot a ridiculous amount of digital, so having digital scans makes for an easy way to manage both mediums (and I just file the negs).

So... Scanning/printing it is.

Even with a DSLR I was never of the "spray and pray" variety. The only exception to this would be BIF (Birds In Flight) generally. Once I transfer images to the computer, I further weed out all the crap that'll never be useful and only process/publish the real keepers of the session.

Yeah, BIF definitely require a faster capture rate! I loved the big Nikon DSLRs for sports photography but I really don't do that anymore and only grab a few shots of the grandkids anymore with the Leica M or the XA.

 

[Neare]

I scan so 1. I can show stuff online and 2. So I don't always have to make contact sheets (you can play around with make believe contrast and dodging/burning to get a feel of what you can make before you get to the darkroom)

I print for shows and work, I'll hopefully start printing for fun more often.

 

[DNG]

I don't Wet Print anymore.
Sooooooo, I scan my 35mm negatives and go from there.
Why pay for scanning, when you can scan yourself. a good scanner and a knowledge of what makes a good scan (I never use scratch removing software, and scan at least 4500dpi optical, at least 2 passes. but 4 or 8 passes mostly--Improves the noise greatly)

I then edit the scans, make a contact sheet, and hang the Negs/contact sheet with the HD folder references in Hanging Neg/contact sheet sheets.

 

[dave lackey]

I don't Wet Print anymore.
Sooooooo, I scan my 35mm negatives and go from there.
Why pay for scanning, when you can scan yourself. a good scanner and a knowledge of what makes a good scan (I never use scratch removing software, and scan at least 4500dpi optical, at least 2 passes. but 4 or 8 passes mostly--Improves the noise greatly)

I then edit the scans, make a contact sheet, and hang files the Negs/contact sheet with the HD folder references

In my case, I only scan snapshots when I want to and it is at most a couple of rolls a month, usually just one and the local lab only charges $10.

Professionally, I need bigger quality scans and the cost is built-in to each project. That is better for me because I can spend more time on other things like shooting, editing and marketing.

Printing is only done when I need a print for hanging, exhibiting, or for a gift. That is infrequent.

 

[furcafe]

1. I scan my film because that's the only way to digitize them. Digitizing negs/sldies has a bunch of advantages for me: (a) I prefer working in the "lightroom" (burning/dodging/cropping) to the darkroom (which I don't have the necessary skills or ready access to 1, anyway, @ least re: color work); (b) Once a file is digital, it's much easier to organize, file, retrieve, etc. (i.e., my computer desktop is much neater than my actual desktop); (c) Digital files are obviously easier to transmit & share electronically; & (d) Digital prints are usually more than good enough for my purposes, especially for color (& I always have my negs/slides for wet printing when needed).

When I do my own scans, I figure I'd might as well do it @ the highest resolution so that I only have to do it once. The main downside to scanning is the time involved & I do scan almost everything that has any potential pictorial value, so I've lately begun to take advantage of the RFF deal @ Precision for color film. I do have prints made from scans, w/8x10" being the smallest. Since the scans from Precision are usually only good for around 12x24" max, I'll re-scan on my Nikon or Minolta for bigger digital prints (or have them drum scanned, etc. for really big prints, say over 24x36", not that I've had occasion to go that big so far).

This is a curiosity question and it is really a two-part question.

1. For you hobbyists: Why do you scan your film negatives/slides? And, do you print anything, either 4x6, 5x7 or larger?

2. For you professionals: Why do you scan your film negatives/slides? Is it necessary for technical reasons or is it for some other reasons like sharing on the forums?

I find the scanning thing somewhat odd.

Personally, for me, I scan some snapshots to share with the family, knowing that they may last a few minutes or a year or so before they are deleted, lost, forgotten or corrupted by a bad hard drive or whatever. It is doubtful that they will survive very long at all....I keep the negatives and any post-processed originals backed up. Any scans for snapshots are cheaply done and rarely are larger than 1 mb.

Professionally, I am currently doing photographic documentaries in book form. Currently, I am using a DIY publisher on-line and in order to do that, of course, I get scans from Precision Camera and they do a very good job with 26mb scans. It is more costly, but I figure that into the cost of the project just as the cost of film and developing. I do not share any professional work on-line. I keep all of that separate from forums and anyone else not professional connected to my images. All negatives and scans are kept in a secure place.

So, I don't have a scanner and do not plan to buy one any time soon though that may change as I don't know how my market will evolve over the next few years.

Just wondering why people feel the need to scan everything just as I wonder why people spray and pray tens of thousand of digital images when very few are all that is required. Also wonder why the average hobbyist doesn't think about the importance of a hard bound photo album to hand down to family or friends in the future.:angel:

 

[thegman]

To share, my family lives around the country, and different parts of the world, Facebook, Flickr and email just makes far more sense than mailing prints.

I have made one photo album, and plan more, it is far more pleasant to browse than on a computer, but the fact is, the people wanting to browse are hundreds or thousands of miles away.

 

[DNG]

In my case, I only scan snapshots when I want to and it is at most a couple of rolls a month, usually just one and the local lab only charges $10.

Professionally, I need bigger quality scans and the cost is built-in to each project. That is better for me because I can spend more time on other things like shooting, editing and marketing.

Printing is only done when I need a print for hanging, exhibiting, or for a gift. That is infrequent.

My snap shoots are with my digital camera.
Film is for my "Serious" photography" along with digital.

 

[dexdog]

I scan primarily because it facilitates file management, especially archiving/backups, and secondarily because it enables digital manipulation of the images.

 

[DNG]

There's a LOT to be said about that. Dodging, burning and spotting wet prints is an art all its own sometimes. Much easier in the digital realm and ridiculously faster!

Agreed...I used to have a lot weird shaped cardboard pieces along with odd shaped holes cut in 8x10 cardboard

Much easier with D/darkroom

 

[Bug]

As a hobbyist, I was lucky to get an old scanner from my father you went through the long and painful task of scanning all of his dias.

I am not shooting so much rolls. So I have them developped without impression to keep the costs low (and as well because I am often dissatisfied with my results). I then scan in less than average quality for archiving/sharing purposes, and as well to decide which ones I want to print.

But, even though I do not have so many rolls to scan, man! is that loooooong!

 

[Neare]

But unlike d/darkroom, real dodging/burning leaves you thinking

I love it when a plan comes together.

 

[rbsinto]

I shoot only colour slide (for myself), and then scan so I can post on the internet or submit to a photo club.
On those rare occasions when I do paid work, it is usually colour print and typically wouldn't be scanned. Instead I'd simply get prints made for the client to choose from, and then let them handel the blance of the process through a photo-finisher.

 

[zauhar]

Speaking as a beginner, I want a scan to get a quick sense of what the "positive" image looks like, to make something I can easily share, and to help me decide which frames I want to print. I am trying to consistently archive my negatives as I go.

I just got a scanner (Canon 9000), and as I described in a another thread I have mixed feelings about the results (albeit I am just using their canned software at the moment, I am reading the comparisons on RFF between Vuescan and Silvefast to see which I want to go with to do a better job of collecting the images).

Pretty happy with the B&W, not so happy with the color negatives. Since I still rely on the photo lab for color scans, that is OK for the moment.

In any event, it is much more interesting to print, and I want to learn some dodging and burning too.

Randy

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

It's very simple: I scan because I don't have a "traditional" darkroom. And if I didn't scan, I wouldn't be able to post samples online.