Welcome to DigiForumz.com!
FAQFAQ    SearchSearch      ProfileProfile    Private MessagesPrivate Messages   Log inLog in

Slide scanning recommendations

 
   Digital Camera Community (Home) -> Scanning RSS
Next:  Recommend Negative Scanner?  
Author Message
BRN

External


Since: Jan 30, 2006
Posts: 1



(Msg. 1) Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2006 3:27 pm
Post subject: Slide scanning recommendations
Archived from groups: rec>photo>digital (more info?)

Hi all,

I have several hundred slides I would like to scan. I figure I have a
couple of options:
1) Pay a professional to scan them
2) Buy a slide scanner (prefer with automatic loading tray).

I'd like to be able to comfortably blow the images up to 11" x 14" for
printing after scanned.

What is the most cost effective way to do this? Professional scanning or
perhaps buying a used slide scanner (eBay or locally)? If I buy a used
scanner, any recommendations for a slide scanner under $200 or maybe even
under $150? Any rec's for a slide scanning service?

Thanks,

BN

 >> Stay informed about: Slide scanning recommendations 
Back to top
Login to vote
Frank ess

External


Since: Aug 02, 2005
Posts: 467



(Msg. 2) Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2006 3:27 pm
Post subject: Re: Slide scanning recommendations [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

"BRN" <brn3a.DeleteThis@removethistoemail.virginia.edu> wrote in message
news:drlsr8$bi4$1@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU...
> Hi all,
>
> I have several hundred slides I would like to scan. I figure I have
> a couple of options:
> 1) Pay a professional to scan them
> 2) Buy a slide scanner (prefer with automatic loading tray).
>
> I'd like to be able to comfortably blow the images up to 11" x 14"
> for printing after scanned.
>
> What is the most cost effective way to do this? Professional
> scanning or perhaps buying a used slide scanner (eBay or locally)?
> If I buy a used scanner, any recommendations for a slide scanner
> under $200 or maybe even under $150? Any rec's for a slide scanning
> service?
>

There are several threads in this and other rec.photo.* groups about
slide scanning. Most of what they contain is good fact- and
experience-based advice. The bottom line is always: you are going to
pay, either through money, or money and time.

Good slide digitizing costs money, and unless you walk the subject
matter into a shop where it is done on the premises, there is a chance
the slides will be lost and gone forever.

Good slide digitizers cost money. The higher-end ones keep their value
pretty well, so you can do what you have to do and get out by
reselling. More likely, you'll become attached to the machine and its
skills, and keep it around.

On the subject of skills, slide digitizing requires some. Few if you
aren't too critical, with auto-modes reasonably well-tuned by now;
much more if you have subject slides that are of real worth, and you
want the best from them. Even basic life-to-life scanning takes
learning time.

Some of the grunt labor is removed from the equation by Digital ICE
and its associates, without which scanning-at-home is wasteful and may
be of a nature to extinguish itself due to the excessive time and
attention required to eliminate spots and scratches.

There does remain some grunt labor: you do have to read the manual,
learn which of myriad options suit your project, and feed the monster
(scanner). Good scanning programs allow for modifications to be
applied across batches, and the (expensive) batch-feeders will help.
The one I know about will do fifty without attention. I have no
experience with the length of time it takes to do such a batch, but
I'd reckon it depends on the detail in the photo and the number of
optional features called into play: multiple scans to draw out detail,
ICE, etc., are boons, but they cost, too.

Then, of course, there is storage of the images. BIG files. Scanned at
4000ppi, an ordinary 35mm scan will take up about 60 MB of your space.
Way too few of those fit on a CD-ROM, so get your DVD burner ready.
That stuff is relatively inexpensive in dollars, but it takes time to
write and verify.

You can see the underlying point: Unless you intend adopting Scanner
Operator as a lifestyle, at least temporarily, you may be better off
researching the pay-for-it providers in your area and becoming a Good
Customer, paying in dollar installments rather than
slice-out-of-your-life payments.

You pays you money/time and you makes you choice.

Now in a perfect world I'd be in a position to select, teach, and
supervise an intelligent, intense intern who would do the work and
take the blame for booboos, while I contemplate the philosophy of
capturing an preserving moments of time for all time. (What's it good
for, anyway? Some day it will all be dust.)

Me, I'm working on my fifth or sixth scanner. Of course I'm one of
those who enjoys the process as much as the product. Usually.

--
Frank ess

 >> Stay informed about: Slide scanning recommendations 
Back to top
Login to vote
Father Kodak

External


Since: Jan 12, 2006
Posts: 135



(Msg. 3) Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2006 3:33 pm
Post subject: Re: Slide scanning recommendations [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

On Mon, 30 Jan 2006 13:45:58 -0800, "Frank ess" <frank.DeleteThis@fshe2fs.com>
wrote:

>
>"BRN" <brn3a.DeleteThis@removethistoemail.virginia.edu> wrote in message
>news:drlsr8$bi4$1@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU...
>
>
>Good slide digitizers cost money. The higher-end ones keep their value
>pretty well, so you can do what you have to do and get out by
>reselling. More likely, you'll become attached to the machine and its
>skills, and keep it around.

Nonetheless, if you look on ebay, you will find a bunch of scanners,
Nikon and other brands, that are being sold because their owners have
finished scanning in their negs/slides and have no further use for the
machine.

I don't necessarily agree with that position, but I understand why
people will think that way. You may find later on that you need to
redo a scan to improve on what you have currently.
>
>On the subject of skills, slide digitizing requires some. Few if you
>aren't too critical, with auto-modes reasonably well-tuned by now;
>much more if you have subject slides that are of real worth, and you
>want the best from them. Even basic life-to-life scanning takes
>learning time.

You haven't commented on software choices:
a. vendor's own software
b. Vuescan
c. Silverfast
>
>Some of the grunt labor is removed from the equation by Digital ICE
>and its associates, without which scanning-at-home is wasteful and may
>be of a nature to extinguish itself due to the excessive time and
>attention required to eliminate spots and scratches.

But, I have heard that ICE doesn't work too well with Kodachromes or
with black-and-white negs. I have no personal experience in this area,
though.
>
[snip]

>
>Then, of course, there is storage of the images. BIG files. Scanned at
>4000ppi, an ordinary 35mm scan will take up about 60 MB of your space.

For the Nikon 5000 ED that 4000 dpi scan produces a 125 MB file at max
color depth.

>Way too few of those fit on a CD-ROM, so get your DVD burner ready.
>That stuff is relatively inexpensive in dollars, but it takes time to
>write and verify.

Yes, and then you have the added issue that recordable DVD media
lifetime is questionable. But if you have a lot of slides to scan,
you get up to multiple GB very quickly. You need a more sophisticated
backup strategy.
>
>You can see the underlying point: Unless you intend adopting Scanner
>Operator as a lifestyle, at least temporarily, you may be better off
>researching the pay-for-it providers in your area and becoming a Good
>Customer, paying in dollar installments rather than
>slice-out-of-your-life payments.

Absolutely agree.

[snip]

Father Kodak
 >> Stay informed about: Slide scanning recommendations 
Back to top
Login to vote
Steven Toney

External


Since: Jan 30, 2006
Posts: 8



(Msg. 4) Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2006 4:57 pm
Post subject: Re: Slide scanning recommendations [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

good post

I think I'm in the "get the toy" camp and will probably get the nikon combo
soon

for the OP -- I expect 2400 dpi or a little less would do well for 11x14
prints -- would save a little time and space

I found 1600\2400 dpi ok for most uses and will likely reserve the 3200\4000
dpi scans for the good ones (a choice)

The worry over slides disappearing when set in for scanning \ duplication is
a real thing -- seen it happen



"Frank ess" <frank.RemoveThis@fshe2fs.com> wrote in message
news:rvidnczxkKOKFEPeRVn-rA@giganews.com...
>
> "BRN" <brn3a.RemoveThis@removethistoemail.virginia.edu> wrote in message
> news:drlsr8$bi4$1@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU...
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I have several hundred slides I would like to scan. I figure I have a
>> couple of options:
>> 1) Pay a professional to scan them
>> 2) Buy a slide scanner (prefer with automatic loading tray).
>>
>> I'd like to be able to comfortably blow the images up to 11" x 14" for
>> printing after scanned.
>>
>> What is the most cost effective way to do this? Professional scanning or
>> perhaps buying a used slide scanner (eBay or locally)? If I buy a used
>> scanner, any recommendations for a slide scanner under $200 or maybe even
>> under $150? Any rec's for a slide scanning service?
>>
>
> There are several threads in this and other rec.photo.* groups about slide
> scanning. Most of what they contain is good fact- and experience-based
> advice. The bottom line is always: you are going to pay, either through
> money, or money and time.
>
> Good slide digitizing costs money, and unless you walk the subject matter
> into a shop where it is done on the premises, there is a chance the slides
> will be lost and gone forever.
>
> Good slide digitizers cost money. The higher-end ones keep their value
> pretty well, so you can do what you have to do and get out by reselling.
> More likely, you'll become attached to the machine and its skills, and
> keep it around.
>
> On the subject of skills, slide digitizing requires some. Few if you
> aren't too critical, with auto-modes reasonably well-tuned by now; much
> more if you have subject slides that are of real worth, and you want the
> best from them. Even basic life-to-life scanning takes learning time.
>
> Some of the grunt labor is removed from the equation by Digital ICE and
> its associates, without which scanning-at-home is wasteful and may be of a
> nature to extinguish itself due to the excessive time and attention
> required to eliminate spots and scratches.
>
> There does remain some grunt labor: you do have to read the manual, learn
> which of myriad options suit your project, and feed the monster (scanner).
> Good scanning programs allow for modifications to be applied across
> batches, and the (expensive) batch-feeders will help. The one I know about
> will do fifty without attention. I have no experience with the length of
> time it takes to do such a batch, but I'd reckon it depends on the detail
> in the photo and the number of optional features called into play:
> multiple scans to draw out detail, ICE, etc., are boons, but they cost,
> too.
>
> Then, of course, there is storage of the images. BIG files. Scanned at
> 4000ppi, an ordinary 35mm scan will take up about 60 MB of your space. Way
> too few of those fit on a CD-ROM, so get your DVD burner ready. That stuff
> is relatively inexpensive in dollars, but it takes time to write and
> verify.
>
> You can see the underlying point: Unless you intend adopting Scanner
> Operator as a lifestyle, at least temporarily, you may be better off
> researching the pay-for-it providers in your area and becoming a Good
> Customer, paying in dollar installments rather than slice-out-of-your-life
> payments.
>
> You pays you money/time and you makes you choice.
>
> Now in a perfect world I'd be in a position to select, teach, and
> supervise an intelligent, intense intern who would do the work and take
> the blame for booboos, while I contemplate the philosophy of capturing an
> preserving moments of time for all time. (What's it good for, anyway? Some
> day it will all be dust.)
>
> Me, I'm working on my fifth or sixth scanner. Of course I'm one of those
> who enjoys the process as much as the product. Usually.
>
> --
> Frank ess
 >> Stay informed about: Slide scanning recommendations 
Back to top
Login to vote
Kinon O'cann

External


Since: Aug 10, 2005
Posts: 66



(Msg. 5) Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2006 7:51 pm
Post subject: Re: Slide scanning recommendations [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

"BRN" <brn3a.TakeThisOut@removethistoemail.virginia.edu> wrote in message
news:drlsr8$bi4$1@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU...
> Hi all,
>
> I have several hundred slides I would like to scan. I figure I have a
> couple of options:
> 1) Pay a professional to scan them
> 2) Buy a slide scanner (prefer with automatic loading tray).
>
> I'd like to be able to comfortably blow the images up to 11" x 14" for
> printing after scanned.
>
> What is the most cost effective way to do this? Professional scanning or
> perhaps buying a used slide scanner (eBay or locally)? If I buy a used
> scanner, any recommendations for a slide scanner under $200 or maybe even
> under $150? Any rec's for a slide scanning service?

Kodak Photo CD. Do not confuse this with the Picture CD, which is a much
lower resolution service. Very good results, moderate price.

>
> Thanks,
>
> BN
>
 >> Stay informed about: Slide scanning recommendations 
Back to top
Login to vote
HvdV

External


Since: Sep 15, 2005
Posts: 22



(Msg. 6) Posted: Tue Jan 31, 2006 2:53 pm
Post subject: Re: Slide scanning recommendations [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

Frank ess wrote:
>
>
> There are several threads in this and other rec.photo.* groups about
> slide scanning. Most of what they contain is good fact- and
> experience-based advice. The bottom line is always: you are going to
> pay, either through money, or money and time.
<snip>
> Me, I'm working on my fifth or sixth scanner. Of course I'm one of those
> who enjoys the process as much as the product. Usually.
That sums it up: 'usually'. Once you get the hang of it scanning film is a
nice lazy 'basket weaving' activity.

One thing to add: Minolta quit the consumer business, so investing in a nice
new Minolta 5400-II is probably not so smart. Though owning one I'd say one
choice less!

-- Hans
 >> Stay informed about: Slide scanning recommendations 
Back to top
Login to vote
Keith Baird

External


Since: Oct 28, 2005
Posts: 14



(Msg. 7) Posted: Tue Jan 31, 2006 2:53 pm
Post subject: Re: Slide scanning recommendations [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

HvdV <nohanz.RemoveThis@svi.nl> wrote:
> One thing to add: Minolta quit the consumer business, so investing in a nice
> new Minolta 5400-II is probably not so smart.

Actually, Minolta is only getting out of the *photographic* business
(cameras, lenses, & photo processing). They haven't announced anything
about eliminating their computer peripherals line.

--/<eith
 >> Stay informed about: Slide scanning recommendations 
Back to top
Login to vote
Bruce Graham

External


Since: Aug 26, 2005
Posts: 40



(Msg. 8) Posted: Tue Jan 31, 2006 4:55 pm
Post subject: Re: Slide scanning recommendations [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

In article <8764o1tonk.fsf.DeleteThis@gw.dd-b.net>, dd-b.DeleteThis@dd-b.net says...
> I find I spend 5 to 30 minutes per image in scanning and preliminary
> image fixup; to give you a vague idea how much time you're talking
> about.
>
> I'm guessing these are older slides. I'd call the "ICE" feature
> (infrared scan channel plus software to fill in the damaged areas by
> interpolation) an abolute necessity for scanning older slides.
>
>
on mine, Kodachrome doesn't clean up with infrared. Some of the newer
ones are OK?
 >> Stay informed about: Slide scanning recommendations 
Back to top
Login to vote
Ken Weitzel

External


Since: Sep 13, 2005
Posts: 206



(Msg. 9) Posted: Tue Jan 31, 2006 4:55 pm
Post subject: Re: Slide scanning recommendations [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

Bruce Graham wrote:
> In article <8764o1tonk.fsf.TakeThisOut@gw.dd-b.net>, dd-b.TakeThisOut@dd-b.net says...
>
>>I find I spend 5 to 30 minutes per image in scanning and preliminary
>>image fixup; to give you a vague idea how much time you're talking
>>about.
>>
>>I'm guessing these are older slides. I'd call the "ICE" feature
>>(infrared scan channel plus software to fill in the damaged areas by
>>interpolation) an abolute necessity for scanning older slides.
>>
>>
>
> on mine, Kodachrome doesn't clean up with infrared. Some of the newer
> ones are OK?

Hi...

For Kodachromes try Polaroid's (free) dust and scratch removal
utility... works great! Smile

Take care.

Ken
 >> Stay informed about: Slide scanning recommendations 
Back to top
Login to vote
HvdV

External


Since: Sep 15, 2005
Posts: 22



(Msg. 10) Posted: Wed Feb 01, 2006 4:14 pm
Post subject: Re: Slide scanning recommendations [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

Keith,
>
>
> Actually, Minolta is only getting out of the *photographic* business
> (cameras, lenses, & photo processing). They haven't announced anything
> about eliminating their computer peripherals line.
>
I hope you are right in that they see the film scanner as a computer peripheral
like their laserprinters rather than 'consumer photo equipment'. Did you see
a positive announcement that this is indeed the case?

-- Hans
 >> Stay informed about: Slide scanning recommendations 
Back to top
Login to vote
Display posts from previous:   
   Digital Camera Community (Home) -> Scanning All times are: Pacific Time (US & Canada) (change)
Page 1 of 1

 
You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum



[ Contact us | Terms of Service/Privacy Policy ]