scanning negatives on commercial copier

Discussion in 'Photography' started by JethroUK©, May 18, 2008.

  1. JethroUK©

    JethroUK© Guest

    I have access to commercial colour copier/scanner at work - but I notice
    negative scanners have special clips that hold about 6 negatives at a time

    is there anything to stop me just putting a strip of colour negatives
    directly onto the glass & setting it to transparency?

    how are negatives normal inverted - by the scanner or by software - is there
    any software that can invert negatives?
     
    JethroUK©, May 18, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. JethroUK©

    Allen Guest

    A. No. The scanner must have a light source _behind_ the slide or
    negative; the normal reflected light in scanners won't work.
    B. The software furnished with scanners will take care of that. Also,
    most photo editing programs will flip BW, but I don't know about color.
    Incidentally, color negatives underwent a huge change in, as I recall,
    in the 1970s; the background color was lightened considerably. I haven't
    done any color neg scanning myself because the old color stuff that I
    scanned was in the form of slides.
    Allen
     
    Allen, May 19, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Yeah, I read in a book (since I was born in 1973) that in that era, you
    could get a negative film without an orange mask, and there after it came
    *always* with an orange mask.
     
    Tzortzakakis Dimitrios, May 19, 2008
    #3
  4. I think that Allen was referring to the transition from C-22 to C-41
    chemistry compatible emulsions, rather than the introduction of the
    orange mask itself, which (without showing my age too much) was more
    than a decade earlier. ;-)

    C-22 films, eg. Kodacolor & Kodacolor-X, had a much deeper orange mask
    than C-41 emulsions such as Kodacolor-II and its many derivatives.
     
    Kennedy McEwen, May 20, 2008
    #4
  5. JethroUK©

    Allen Guest

    Correct. I used very little color neg film in C-22 days, as the quality
    of reasonably priced commercial prints was pretty low. Also, although I
    processed many, many rolls of slide film I never got into color neg
    processing, lacking a darkroom (very hard to get an enlarger into a
    changing bag). I had a darkroom in my parents' house many years ago (I'm
    79, so I do mean many), but it went away when I went away. I used rental
    darkrooms for BW printing with very good success, but no color.
    Allen
     
    Allen, May 21, 2008
    #5
  6. My first ventures into colour processing were using the C-22 process and
    still preferred it for a long while after C-41 came along. The lower
    process temperature and longer times were much more amateur friendly
    and, although it still had to be maintained very precisely it was easier
    to do around 20C compared to 40C. In those terms it was a similar
    change as going from E-4 to E-6.
     
    Kennedy McEwen, May 21, 2008
    #6
  7. I had a colour darkroom, in Kozani ( a town in the Northwest Macedonia;not
    the country, the greek province) and I did slides and colour prints, also
    Ilfochromes. I had gotten some Tetenal chemicals, that you could do the RA-4
    process at room temperature, also 20 C. Then, the local shop (in Athens)
    shut down and I came back to Iraklion, so I started using the Kodak RA-4
    Hobby Pak ( and the E-6 Hobby Pak, goes without saying). My photos, except
    half a dozen or so, were nothing to write home about.... My digital era
    photos, are much better, and produced with much less hassle.....
     
    Tzortzakakis Dimitrios, May 21, 2008
    #7
  8. Tetenal also did their version of EP-2 chemistry that worked around 20C,
    long before RA-4 high speed processing appeared, and in the UK there was
    "Photocolor-II" universal C-41 and Ektaprint chemistry that worked at
    18-45C by controlling process time. I never found any of these third
    party chemistries to be as satisfactory as Kodak's own home process
    kits, although I eventually standardised on Fuji paper.

    Yes, digital is much simpler and the results are certainly superior -
    but after 50 years of progress you would expect them to be! ;-)
     
    Kennedy McEwen, May 21, 2008
    #8
  9. JethroUK©

    Pat Guest

    My negative scanner's software has inversion software are part of the
    driver. It also has profiles for different types of film. But if you
    don't have such software, most popular photo editing software has an
    invert function.
     
    Pat, May 22, 2008
    #9
  10. Yeah, I remember they had EP-2 chemicals and papers, and also R-3 (IIRC),
    the one that lets you make a print directly from a slide. I liked the
    tetenal cheicals very much. I used Tetenal paper, and then Kodak. When I
    went digital, a few years ago, I gave all of it away, to my sister's friend,
    paper and all. I got the Ilfochrome kit from a shop in Munich, with detailed
    instructions in german, good for practising them:)
    Good, that scientists do so much to improve our life:) Mobile phones, fast
    computers, clean cars and digital photography.
     
    Tzortzakakis Dimitrios, May 23, 2008
    #10
    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.