Hi End scanning service

In article <1162095938.282692.3680.TakeThisOut@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
Sam Carleton <scarleton.TakeThisOut@gmail.com> wrote:
>1: I can learn how to use my Nikon 5000 Coolscan (I am thinking I will
>need to buy the $350 SilverFast software and a book or two)

In my experience it is not the scanning that is hard, but the post processing.
Well exposed slide film (I use mainly Provia and Astia) scans very well
on an LS-4000, and I expect that the LS-5000 will not be any worse.

But when you have the scan, you also have to know how to change the color
balance, contrast, how to sharpen, etc. And you probably want to know about
noise reduction as well.

If you ever want to do digital photography, you have to get those skills
as well.

For scanning slides, NikonScan plus Photoshop should be good enough.

>2: I could outsource it to a high end lab.

If you don't know anything about digital printing, it might be
a good idea to try outsource the complete process from slide to print.

>>From what I have learned about scanning, it is a true art form. I get
>the impression that it would take me some time to master it, time I
>would prefer to spend behind the camera.

Scanning negatives is hard. Scanning well exposed slides on an LS-5000
should not be any harder than using a RAW convertor for a digital camera.

But post processing in general requires the ability to see how the image
you got differs from what you want, and knowing how to correct is.
And that requires quite a bit of training.


--
That was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it
could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done
by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make.
-- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency
 >> Stay informed about: Hi End scanning service 

On Sun, 29 Oct 2006 09:55:43 +0100, philip.RemoveThis@ue.aioy.eu (Philip Homburg)
wrote:


>Scanning negatives is hard. Scanning well exposed slides on an LS-5000
>should not be any harder than using a RAW convertor for a digital camera.


Jeez, there's both you and Dave L. saying that.

Personally, I find slides harder because of their
much greater density.


rafe b
www.terrapinphoto.com
 >> Stay informed about: Hi End scanning service 

Philip Homburg wrote:

> But when you have the scan, you also have to know how to change the color
> balance, contrast, how to sharpen, etc. And you probably want to know about
> noise reduction as well.
>
> If you ever want to do digital photography, you have to get those skills
> as well.
>
> For scanning slides, NikonScan plus Photoshop should be good enough.
>
> >2: I could outsource it to a high end lab.
>
> If you don't know anything about digital printing, it might be
> a good idea to try outsource the complete process from slide to print.

I have been digital capture now for about two years, shooting the Nikon
D2H. There are two reasons for returning to film:

1: The Nikkon 35-18 f/3.5~4.5 is a LOT cheaper then the 12-24/4. It
looks like I can pick up a used one for about $200~$300 on eBay,
compared to a new 12-24/4 for about $1000.
2: I simply LOVE shooting film, there is nothing like looking at chrome
on a light table!
3: I do beleive that with a good scan and correct PP I can get better
detail out of Velvia then I can my 4.1MP Nikon D2H. Mind you, I am
targetting 13x19 and maybe larger prints.

Sam
 >> Stay informed about: Hi End scanning service 

David J. Littleboy wrote:
> "Sam Carleton" <scarleton RemoveThis @gmail.com> wrote:
> >I am working on a project in which I am shooting 35mm E6. I am going
> > to need to get 12 high quality scans to make museum quality 12x18
> > prints. I see two options:
>
> There's a third option. Shoot 6x7 and scan on either an Epson V750 or get
> professional scans.
>
> And a fourth option: Shoot with a Canon 5D.
>
> And a fifth option: Shoot with any 8MP or higher dSLR, mount the camera
> vertically on the tripod, and shoot three frames and stitch.

Well, the later part of the 5th option won't work, for what I am
shooting is NOT landscape, I have to capture it in one click, cannot
stitch...

The main reason I am NOT using my current dSLR (Nikon D2H) is not
because of the lack of MP, but because of lack of funds for the correct
lens for the project. I did consider shooting 6x7, but when I looked
at the cost of the equipment, it would cost me more then the Nikon lens
I need. Like I said in my other posting, I am in need of an ultra wide
zoom for this project. And then there is the Canon 5D, great camera, I
would love to have it, but it minus well be the Leica M8 (which I would
opt for before the 5D).

> Scanning isn't rocket science, and, IMHO, is worth putting in the time to
> learn. You'll learn a lot about photography. Since you've got the 5000, I
> strongly recommend doing it.

You know what, I have been playing/learning about photography for years
and years now. I am 35 and have been behind a camera camera sinse I
was 14. This project is what I plain to use to launch me into a
professional career as a photographer, so my goal is to invest my money
and time in the best possible way. I don't think learning to scan film
is the best use of either my time or money right now. I also think
that I could use the $$$ for the 12-24 in film scanning and prints.

Maybe my best bet is to find a lab that can simply print my chrome
dirrectly and skip the whole digital phase of things all together.

Sam
http://www.miltonstreet.com
http://www.sportsshooter.com/scarleton
http://photos.miltonstreet.com/
 >> Stay informed about: Hi End scanning service 

Rita Ä Berkowitz wrote:
> Sam Carleton wrote:
>
> > I have been digital capture now for about two years, shooting the
> > Nikon D2H. There are two reasons for returning to film:
> >
> > 1: The Nikkon 35-18 f/3.5~4.5 is a LOT cheaper then the 12-24/4. It
> > looks like I can pick up a used one for about $200~$300 on eBay,
> > compared to a new 12-24/4 for about $1000.
>
> Smart money goes on the Tokina 12-24 ($475 NEW) since the Nikon 12-24 is an
> utter dog. The Tokina blows the Nikon away in every respect except AF
> speed, which isn't a concern at WA.

Rita,

When you say the Nikkor 12-24/4 is a dog, is this from personal
experience? I have not owned either the Nikon or the Tokina, but I
have handled both. I found the ring that switches the Tokina from MF
to AF to be a really crummy design. In a camera store, initially I did
something where it did not fully engage from one to the other. I did
not like it, I don't want to be fumbling around like that when I am
working.

Also, from all I have read the Nikon is a hair better then the Tokina.
Is it worth $500 more? It is relative. If you are not making money
with it and you are simply a hobbies, more then likely not. If you are
a pro, or someone working on becoming a pro (like I am), then IMHO
every bit counts, every last bit. I have no problem spending 2X for a
10% improvement in quality, if I have the 2X to spend. Otherwise I
would prefer to punt and take another approach: Use equally sharp
glass that cost 1/5 the price and shoot film. Mind you, I much prefer
film over digital, I just cannot justify the cost of film for things
like Senior portraits. For this project I can when I am saving $800 on
a lens.

Oh, and there is the last reason: I, personally, do *NOT* buy 3rd
party lens. I have once or twice in the past and I have NEVER been
satisfied.

So, after over ten posts on this subject, I have yet seen an answer to
my question:

Where can I find a lab that can provide me with some hi rez scans of my
35mm slides? I am looking for drum scans, actually. I guess I should
have said that to begin with, opps;)
--
Sam
http://www.miltonstreet.com
http://www.sportsshooter.com/scarleton
http://photos.miltonstreet.com/
 >> Stay informed about: Hi End scanning service 

"Sam Carleton" <scarleton.RemoveThis@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1162095938.282692.3680@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> I am working on a project in which I am shooting 35mm E6. I am going
> to need to get 12 high quality scans to make museum quality 12x18
> prints. I see two options:
>
> 1: I can learn how to use my Nikon 5000 Coolscan (I am thinking I will
> need to buy the $350 SilverFast software and a book or two)
> 2: I could outsource it to a high end lab.
>
> >From what I have learned about scanning, it is a true art form. I get
> the impression that it would take me some time to master it, time I
> would prefer to spend behind the camera. Considering the limited
> number of scans I need, I get the impression that it will also be more
> cost effective to outsource it.
>
> So, can anyone recommend a high end pro lab that can give me amazing
> scans from my E6 film?
>
> Sam

Hi Sam,

I'm surprised nobody suggested that you consider that professional slide
scanners probably use a drum scanner and that they are the top quality you
can expect from scanning slides. I've scanned on my Minolta slide scanner
successfully, but newer scanners, in addition to more color bits, also have
better dark image results.

There is an aftermarket software program, providing that your scanner would
be USB based, that can provide better dust management, I can't remember its
name, because I didn't buy it(I just blew the dust off).

Joe
 >> Stay informed about: Hi End scanning service 

In article <g259k2djsgp9pc0sqkahgvd7kj5ugia9p9.DeleteThis@4ax.com>,
Raphael Bustin <rafeb.DeleteThis@speakeasy.net> wrote:
>Personally, I find slides harder because of their
>much greater density.

In my experience, well exposed Provia and Astia scan very well on
Nikon scanners.

With well exposed, I mean that everything you need is within the 5 stops
where slide film has a more or less constant gamma.

I switch to print film for anything that has more contrast than those
5 stops.

Of course, all to often there will be details in high lights or
shadows that you want to save.

But if OP is going to make slides with the intention of making high quality
prints, then he simply has to make sure that the contrast does not
exceed what the slide can handle, or he should switch to print film.


--
That was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it
could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done
by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make.
-- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency
 >> Stay informed about: Hi End scanning service 

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: Hi End scanning service 

"Sam Carleton" <scarleton DeleteThis @gmail.com> writes:
> When you say the Nikkor 12-24/4 is a dog, is this from personal
> experience?

I dunno whether the 12-24/4 is an outright dog, but I do know that the
17-35/2.8 Nikkor is supposed to be one of the best Nikkors ever made.
The 17-35 is around 1.5x the price of the 12-24 but it's a full stop
faster in addition to having 2x the coverage. That immediately tells
me the 12-24 is not a good value.

The Tokina 12-24/4 and the Sigma 10-20/4-5.6 have been well received
on nikonians.org (a bunch of Nikophiles if there ever was one), if
that matters.
 >> Stay informed about: Hi End scanning service 

On 29 Oct 2006 07:49:55 -0800, Sam Carleton wrote:

> The main reason I am NOT using my current dSLR (Nikon D2H) is not
> because of the lack of MP, but because of lack of funds for the correct
> lens for the project. I did consider shooting 6x7, but when I looked
> at the cost of the equipment, it would cost me more then the Nikon lens
> I need. Like I said in my other posting, I am in need of an ultra wide
> zoom for this project. And then there is the Canon 5D, great camera, I
> would love to have it, but it minus well be the Leica M8 (which I would
> opt for before the 5D).

As you said that you'll only need 12 images, would it be worth
considering renting the desired lens for a day or two? I assume
that each picture won't be taken in a different city or country.
 >> Stay informed about: Hi End scanning service 

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: Hi End scanning service 

Rita Ä Berkowitz wrote:

> I've played with both and I'm like you when it comes to third party lenses,
> I really don't want one. The issue for me is I can buy either one at a drop
> of the hat, but I'm not going to buy the Nikon since the sharpness and
> saturation is so much better on the Tokina. My feelings are any 12-24 I buy
> is going to be a throwaway when Nikon goes to a full frame sensor. The
> final image quality is the only thing that is important to me. So, the
> Tokina is going to be a stopgap for me till the FF Nikon hits the scene.
> The 17-35mm will be pretty much welded on the body.

Rita,

Did you see this article:

http://www.e-fotografija.com/artman/publish/article_1195.shtml

FF Nikon does come up and an explaination of why it does not exist is
give that I had not heard before: "The FF sensors are simply too
expensive right now" I have a feeling that a FF Nikon is a ways off,
like two to five years out. I don't think Nikon has written it off, I
just also think they are not moving that direction real fast.

Just thought I would let you know what I heard;)

Sam
 >> Stay informed about: Hi End scanning service 

ASAAR wrote:

> As you said that you'll only need 12 images, would it be worth
> considering renting the desired lens for a day or two? I assume
> that each picture won't be taken in a different city or country.

You know what, that makes a LOT of sense, I had not thought of that
before. Maybe I could also rent a higher MP camera for the job, too.
Thank you!

Sam
 >> Stay informed about: Hi End scanning service