Digital Slide Duplicator

Discussion in 'Australia Photography' started by HC, Jan 7, 2006.

  1. HC

    HC Guest

    G'day

    Just wondering if anyone has used a Digital Slide Duplicator please?
    Your thoughts/suggestions/etc would be appreciated.

    Also if anyone has one for sale secondhand I might be interested as I
    suspect they'd be an item that would only need to be used once and when
    the transfer is done they would be excess?? Maybe I'm wrong?

    Here's one example but, as always, there are others.

    http://www.maxwell.com.au/products/cabin/duplicator.html

    Thanks
    Bronwyn ;-)
     
    HC, Jan 7, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. HC

    k Guest

    | G'day
    |
    | Just wondering if anyone has used a Digital Slide Duplicator please?
    | Your thoughts/suggestions/etc would be appreciated.
    |
    | Also if anyone has one for sale secondhand I might be interested as I
    | suspect they'd be an item that would only need to be used once and when
    | the transfer is done they would be excess?? Maybe I'm wrong?
    |
    | Here's one example but, as always, there are others.
    |
    | http://www.maxwell.com.au/products/cabin/duplicator.html




    a cheap, quick replacement for a film scanner - though skill is required to
    use it properly and the optical degradation might not make it a truly
    pleasant experience..

    although film scanning is a PITA, the 24MP output from a 4000 dpi scanner
    will be better than a 6 or 8 or 12 Mp camera shot through cheap optics

    A decent macro lens on the copier would be advantageous, you could instead
    buy a proper slide duplicator rail (then you may as well buy a Bowens slide
    duper - if you want one, I have one for sale)

    Or you could just set up a macro outfit - a sheet of white perspex, a flash
    and a good macro lens and save yourself the $$

    In the end though a film scanner would give the best results..

    The Canon 4000dpi tops the ranks for the sharpest optics (and the shittiest
    software, Vuescan fixes that tho) and running the scanner in a multipass
    fashion with Vuescan like a drum scanner effectively does, you can easily
    replicated the quality of a drum scan

    The Nikon brand of scanner ensures prestige and will guarantee support and
    induce feelings of respect amoung photographers though..


    feeling a bit prickly today

    must be the heat..


    k
     
    k, Jan 7, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. HC

    Jeff R Guest


    These devices are fine, IMNSHO, but they do tend to increase the contrast in
    the duplicated image. I guess that isn't so much of a problem nowadays,
    although range will be lost.

    My HP slide scanner does a great job, too, but dust is an absolute b*&^%^rd!
    ....and the time! ...and the file size!

    Best results with the scanner, but the duplicator is about 20 times faster.
    Best duplicator results using the sky as a backdrop on a bright cloudy day -
    again, nowadays, that's not so much of an issue.
     
    Jeff R, Jan 7, 2006
    #3
  4. HC

    Noons Guest

    That used to be the problem as well with slide duplicators and
    Kodak slide dup film. I wonder if it is the same thing here?

    I've still got my old slide duplicator. Fits right into an F mount,
    although probably in the dslr field only a D200 or D2-series
    would meter properly. I wonder if something like that would be
    better than this "digital" duplicator/to dx-lens/to dslr approach?
    Less glass in between and all that?

    Join the club...
     
    Noons, Jan 7, 2006
    #4
  5. HC

    kosh Guest

    check out what is availble in the King brand... Adeal distributes it.
    You shoul dbe able to get it ordered from almost any camera store.

    basic tube with a slide holder and clear perspex at the end. you can
    find their general catalogue at adeal.com.au

    the cabin will probably be better quality... thie king is probably quite
    cheap in caomparison.

    kosh
     
    kosh, Jan 7, 2006
    #5
  6. HC

    kosh Guest

    just checked their catalogue... part number 500820 .. goes to a
    T-mount.. then you just need the T-camera brand adaptor.

    kosh
     
    kosh, Jan 7, 2006
    #6
  7. HC

    HC Guest

    Thanks for all the replies. Have been planning to do the scanner thing
    for yonks but as others have mentioned it still hasn't been done and I
    wondered if this was a quicker, easier way around the problem.

    I might experiment with some tube and a slide holder to gauge the
    results. Another project to add to the never-ending list!!

    Thanks again
    Bronwyn ;-)
     
    HC, Jan 7, 2006
    #7
  8. HC

    Ole Larsen Guest

    HC skrev:
    It is often recommended to project the slides and photograph the image
    with a dig. camera. Raw would make the wb issue easy. Havn´t tried, though
     
    Ole Larsen, Jan 7, 2006
    #8
  9. HC

    HC Guest

    Mmmm....I tried that with some old 16mm footage while I had the chance
    to borrow a projector a few years ago, but naturally using a video
    camera on the tripod. The results were much better than anticipated.
    Might have to try it with the slides...sounds like a good wet weather job?

    Thanks
    Bronwyn ;-)
     
    HC, Jan 7, 2006
    #9
  10. HC

    cubilcle281 Guest

    If you are going digital, I would suggest a scanner.

    Unlike the other suggestions you have already had, I would also
    recommend getting a Nikon scanner with the multislide adaptor, so you
    could set up the slides to scan & go and do something else more
    important.

    Yes, you are looking at $$$$ for the scanner and then another $900 for
    the adaptor, but the good news is they retain their value, so you could
    onsell it after you are done.

    I am on the first box of 3000 family slides, and all is going well so
    far. At the end I plan to have 3000 'raw' scans (across many DVDs, at
    2700dpi they are 40+mb per image & I will only go back & process them
    as required, but I will have my own archive should something horrible
    happen to the originals.

    C
     
    cubilcle281, Jan 7, 2006
    #10
  11. HC

    k Guest

    | If you are going digital, I would suggest a scanner.
    |
    | Unlike the other suggestions you have already had, I would also
    | recommend getting a Nikon scanner with the multislide adaptor, so you
    | could set up the slides to scan & go and do something else more
    | important.
    |
    | Yes, you are looking at $$$$ for the scanner and then another $900 for
    | the adaptor, but the good news is they retain their value, so you could
    | onsell it after you are done.



    both VERY good points!

    k
     
    k, Jan 7, 2006
    #11
  12. HC

    kosh Guest

    perhaps because the request was for a slide duplicator rather than a
    scanner. Not thepreffered method... but as you pointed out a scanner is
    $$$$.
     
    kosh, Jan 7, 2006
    #12
  13. HC

    Roy Mock Guest

    I'm not sure of your long term goals, here, Bronwyn.

    If you want to digitize for some immediate projects, your query is fine.

    And I see it OK for short time archive for a few years at least on something
    like DVD.

    For me, apart from the exercise of digitising, format and storage are worth
    thinking thru. Format (RAW or TIFF or otherwise) will determine how you
    want to store the material for future use. There's all sorts of storage
    types - some are going out of vogue and newer ones are being embraced.

    For really long term archive of (say) 20+ years, I'm inclined to think that
    hard copy prints are the way to go because they can always be reproduced
    with the technology of the day.

    Those are my immediate thoughts. I'm sure others may think otherwise.

    I wish you well in your pursuit.

    Cheers.
     
    Roy Mock, Jan 8, 2006
    #13
  14. HC

    Rob Guest

    These are OK to use. Usually no supp lens to degregate the image as the
    digital cameras will focus down quite close.

    There is a technique to use, as a digital camera will give different
    results than a scanner. But, saying that, to obtain good results its a
    lot more trouble than a scanner. Obviously you need to use a photo
    editing software to enhance the image whatever your option.
     
    Rob, Jan 8, 2006
    #14
  15. HC

    Phred Guest

    While that approach sounds very attractive -- indeed, I had been more
    or less planning to do something like that to "archive" several
    hundred boxes of slides. However, a pro I know tells me that while
    you *can* get excellent results from a good dedicated slide scanner,
    you *can't* get better than mediocre to average results if you go the
    auto feed route without individual attention to each slide.

    I'm inclined to agree with him (judging by the refocusing that needs
    to be done continually when projecting slides) so I'm tending to the
    view that the scanned images will NOT be an adequate backup of the
    original slides, but would be useful for digital cataloguing and
    indexing the collection. One would probably need to go back to the
    physical slide for any images subsequently selected for reproduction.

    I would be interested to hear other views on this before spending all
    those $$$$.
    Cheers, Phred.
     
    Phred, Jan 8, 2006
    #15
  16. HC

    k Guest

    |



    | For really long term archive of (say) 20+ years, I'm inclined to think
    that
    | hard copy prints are the way to go because they can always be reproduced
    | with the technology of the day.


    The Washington Museum's take on this is to archive to film :)

    Digital stuff submitted to them are sent to a film burner

    k
     
    k, Jan 8, 2006
    #16
  17. HC

    Roy Mock Guest

    Thanks for that.

    Cheers.
     
    Roy Mock, Jan 8, 2006
    #17
  18. HC

    Rob Guest


    Whilst its a quick method all scans need after scan attention. I scan 4
    slides at a time acquiring them through PShop and post process them as I
    go. Seems to work and if any need a rescan I do it there and then.

    To achieve top scans then yes particular attention on an individual
    basis. Slides should be adjusted in the scanner preview, prior to the
    full scan, as the scanner makes the appropriate adjustments to the final
    and not having to make major alterations in the photo edit software.

    This depends on the scanner and slides as to focus. Whilst glassless
    scan is cleaner sometimes you have to use a glass carrier.

    Another point is some scanners have a greater DOF, Nikon for example has
    a shallow DOF which is documented on the net, (brightness/type of
    lighting used)


    I have a Minolta Scan Multi Pro and I think that this is an excellent
    scanner as it suits my requirements. It does upto 6x9 and having ICE
    Cubed. (ROC GEM and Dust). Comes with all the accessories required.
    Sounds like you may need ROC for the Agfa Slide film. (www.asf.com - a
    Kodak company now)
     
    Rob, Jan 9, 2006
    #18
  19. HC

    HC Guest

    G'day Rob

    Have you used one yourself?

    Thanks for all the other good info too, but I didn't want to have to buy
    a new scanner. Have to give the project a bit more thought and decide
    which is the best option.

    Bronwyn ;-)
     
    HC, Jan 9, 2006
    #19
  20. HC

    k Guest

    | Phred wrote:


    | I have a Minolta Scan Multi Pro and I think that this is an excellent
    | scanner as it suits my requirements. It does upto 6x9 and having ICE
    | Cubed. (ROC GEM and Dust). Comes with all the accessories required.
    | Sounds like you may need ROC for the Agfa Slide film. (www.asf.com - a
    | Kodak company now)


    another option is to use the highly aclaimed and free Polaroid Dust and
    Scratch Removal tool from polaroid's site

    not as good as using a built in IR scan pass to ID solid particles (not that
    this works with B&W) but it does a fine job nonetheless

    k
     
    k, Jan 9, 2006
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.