scanning slides in Australia

Discussion in 'Australia Photography' started by kerravon, May 13, 2009.

  1. kerravon

    kerravon Guest

    Hi. My sister (in Brisbane, Australia) is scanning slides.

    She is using a Canon MP800 and it is cropping some of the pictures.

    She rang the Canon help desk and they told her that the scanning
    area can't be enlarged. I find that hard to believe.

    Regardless, given the amount of slides she needs to scan, and
    the amount of work that entails, and she wants to correct damage
    to the slides over the (30) years at the same time, I thought it
    would probably be worth investing in proper equipment for the
    job.

    So what is available for say $1000-$2000? I don't want to spend
    $2000 if $1000 will do nearly as good a job, but I don't want to get
    a reasonable job for $1000 when you can get a fantastic,
    near-perfect job for $2000.

    Scanning other things like 35mm film or APS film or printed
    photos is also a possibility for the future.

    Thanks. Paul.
     
    kerravon, May 13, 2009
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Yeah, who isn't.
    I've got a Nikon CoolScan.
    Amazing, isn't it?
    Funny, most of my slides are still in good condition. What's happened to hers?
    Might be better to get the best you can get and then sell it after you're done.
    At least that way, you get decent equipment and you recover some of the money.
    You'd need a flatbed for prints (or photograph them). My CoolScan will take neg
    strips. Not sure if the newer version does. Only problem is that its all manual.
    You need to go to high end commercial equipment to process them in batches.

    There's also a few commercial outfits that do them but they aren't cheap. Photo
    stores will outsource to them.

    --

    - KRudd at his finest.

    "The Labour Party is corrupt beyond redemption!"
    - Labour hasbeen Mark Latham in a moment of honest clarity.

    "This is the recession we had to have!"
    - Paul Keating explaining why he gave Australia another Labour recession.

    "Silly old bugger!"
    - Well known ACTU pisspot and sometime Labour prime minister Bob Hawke
    responding to a pensioner who dared ask for more.

    "By 1990, no child will live in poverty"
    - Bob Hawke again, desperate to win another election.

    "A billion trees ..."
    - Borke, pissed as a newt again.

    "Well may we say 'God save the Queen' because nothing will save the governor
    general!"
    - Egotistical shithead and pompous fuckwit E.G. Whitlam whining about his
    appointee for Governor General John Kerr.
     
    Dr. Sir John Howard, AC, WSCMoF, May 13, 2009
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. kerravon

    Noons Guest

    kerravon wrote,on my timestamp of 13/05/2009 9:06 PM:

    Assuming it's 35mm dedicated film scanner you want, get a Nikon Coolscan V ED on
    ebay for between 500 and 1000. They are the best at that price range. If you
    really want the top, go for a 5000 ED: it'll cost you around 2 grand but there
    is nothing better at the moment except a 9000 (a lot more expensive!). Ignore
    anyone that tells you a IV ED, 4000 or 8000 ED are the same: they are most
    definitely not, much older technology. There is a very good reason Nikon came up
    with the newer series.


    Printed stuff means using flatbed scanner. That is a totally different animal.
    The best around for a good price is the Epson V750. That will scan film and
    slides as well, but the two Nikon dedicated film scanners above will run rings
    around the Epson for top quality in those. If you can compromise a little bit
    on quality, the Epson is a good overall solution.

    Be ready to invest on additional software to post-process the scans. One of the
    most fundamental errors in scanning is to assume the process itself does
    everything. It does not. You need good de-noiser software, a good image editor
    and good sharpening software.

    And lots of disk space and a good printer, if planning to put them out in
    anything other than computer screens. Or else be prepared to outsource the
    printing - not a bad idea either!

    You can always resell a Nikon scanner on ebay, for not much less than you paid
    for it: they are in constant demand. Epsons lose a bit of value, but not much
    more. So you can always recoup the investment in hardware later on.

    I have heaps of examples of scanned film in my gallery here:
    http://wizofoz2k.deviantart.com/gallery/#_browse
    I use a 9000 and a V ED. You can clearly see there how good some of the scans
    can be. But I do post-processing, unlike so many others.

    HTH
     
    Noons, May 13, 2009
    #3
  4. kerravon

    Pete D Guest

    My Canon 8400F will do 8 slides at a time, the results are quite good and
    the scanner was only about $300, will also do 35mm, MF and and LF negs. If
    all you want to do is print at say up to 8x10 then this setup would do you
    well.

    Cheers.

    Pete
     
    Pete D, May 13, 2009
    #4
  5. We have an EPSON STYLUS PHOTO RX510 and have copied slides and negatives
    quite successfully. We bought this multi function printer (for around $300
    at Harvey Norman) a couple of years ago and it is still working
    beautifully. It would be worth checking if epson still has these or even an
    updated version.
    Hope this helps, Mary
     
    Mary Anglesea, May 14, 2009
    #5
  6. kerravon

    k Guest

    | Hi. My sister (in Brisbane, Australia) is scanning slides.
    |
    | She is using a Canon MP800 and it is cropping some of the pictures.
    |
    | She rang the Canon help desk and they told her that the scanning
    | area can't be enlarged. I find that hard to believe.
    |


    before you blow any money on hardware, try downloading Vuescan
    http://www.hamrick.com/ and giving it a go. It'll give you access to the
    hardware layer of the scanner rather than being forced to access it through
    the software (which can do dumb things like crop, clip curves and other
    nasty things) - Vuescan also lets you do multipass scans. yay :)


    My first attempts at driving the incredibly sharp Canon FS4000US were
    nothing short of dissapointing using Canons software, and it made all the
    Nikons of the day look really good. Once I loaded Vuescan and tried all the
    scanners again on the same images, the Canon outshone everything. Canon
    made such a dogs breakfast of the scanner software that the scanner was all
    but useless out of the box.

    If Vuescan solves the problem, but the standard version and you'll never
    look back. Being able to use the same software to drive almost any scanner
    streamlines workflow enormously - and you *may* find you have access to more
    of the film area than the Canon software gives you.





    After that, try Polaroids free 'Dust and Scratch Removal Tool' and see how
    it goes 'repairing' images. That can save a lot of time and does a very
    good job for a free product. You can still go nuts clone stamping every
    last scratch manually if you want, but after the first few weeks, you might
    find the tool will stave off insanity.
    http://www.polaroid.com/service/software/poladsr/poladsr.html



    Neatimage will clean up the rest http://www.neatimage.com/ . The free tool
    only does one image at a time, batching capabilities available with the
    commercial version - and get the standalone version not the PS plugin. No
    point having Adobe hogging your resources when you all you want to do is
    clean images, all it'll do is slow you down. Build a profile for your
    images and you can automate noise removal and sharpening. If you're lazy,
    have a look for the free to download profiles already created by users.
    Some of them are pretty good http://www.neatimage.com/profiles.html
     
    k, May 14, 2009
    #6
  7. kerravon

    Mr.T Guest


    Since the budget will easily buy one of the good Nikon film scanners, or
    Canons own FS4000, I wouldn't waste my time doing more than a couple of
    slides for web purposes with the MP800 or 8400F. Which is not to say the
    8400F is not a good general purpose scanner if that's all the budget allowed
    for, and better than the MP800 at least. The difference between a proper
    film scanner and a flatbed however, makes the other choices a waste of time
    and money IMO.

    MrT.
     
    Mr.T, May 15, 2009
    #7
  8. kerravon

    Pete D Guest

    Depends on many things. What problems did you encounter when using the
    8400F? For the low cost and a small amount of trial and error a great result
    can be had. If you have only a few snaps to scan then I highly recommend it,
    if you need more then I would be surprised that the OP would ask here.



    Cheers.

    Pete
     
    Pete D, May 15, 2009
    #8
  9. kerravon

    Billy Guest


    Its quicker and the results are not much different if you just copy the
    slides with a camera.

    I use a diffused tungsten light source and a colour correction filter.
    DSLR and macro lens all on a copy stand.

    Slides are not very good compared to a digital camera image.

    Have a look at a EU3C Filmscan35 II - Adeal are the importer. very
    cheap and would be sufficient. $99 USD don't have an australian price
    but will have and they have heaps of distributors
    around Australia and Brisbane. www.adeal.com.au
     
    Billy, May 15, 2009
    #9
  10. kerravon

    Mr.T Guest

    it,


    **IF** only a "few snaps" are required then I would agree.


    Then you should simply re-read what he actually wrote!
    If his sister is unhappy with the MP800, and is prepared to pay $1,000 to
    $2,000 for something to do the job *properly*, then suggesting the 8400F is
    stupid IMO.
    I guess you have never used a proper slide scanner, or attempted to make
    quality digital enlargements from them.

    OTOH I do recommend the 8400F to many people who do not wish to spend too
    much on a general purpose scanner, and can live with it's limitations,
    especially since most are not interested in scanning slides anyway. And when
    they do, a 6"x4" print is usually all they want.

    MrT.
     
    Mr.T, May 16, 2009
    #10
  11. kerravon

    Mr.T Guest

    Works, but will cost nearly as much as a slide scanner, assuming you already
    have a high quality DSLR, unless you also have the macro lens already.
    In fact good slides from a good quality SLR are comparable to a similar
    digital image from a DSLR costing more money. I suggest you find a good
    slide and have it professionally drum scanned so you can make a real
    comparison.
    (not that a good DSLR isn't far more convenient these days however)
    "Sufficient" for who? Maybe for you, but I doubt the OP would agree from
    what he wrote.
    Using such a cheap scanner is obviously the reason you think slides are so
    poor compared to digital camera's.
    (only 5 Mpixels, and no mention of Dmax, probably because it's woeful, along
    with the optics I bet )
    Do you also think a $100 P&S digital camera is "sufficient" for everyone?
    Even they do more than 5Mpixels these days.
    IF you only want to put a few slide "snaps" on the web, it would be fine,
    but probably cheaper, easier and better to just have the slides scanned for
    you.

    MrT.
     
    Mr.T, May 16, 2009
    #11
  12. kerravon

    Billy Guest

    That is what I have and use, its optional for others, its not advice of
    must have and never intended that way. Its just shared information.


    I can imagine going out and having 500 slides drum scanned yep. The
    bloke with that old drum scanner would be laughing all the way to the
    bank. Yes I know the quality off a drum.


    Now if you scan slides its only for reference and good or the best maybe
    worth a good scan.

    Being either placed up on a computer screen or made into a print these
    can/are used at much lower resolution to achieve acceptable results.
    BTW I do have a 120 film scanner 3200/4800dpi

    have a collection of slide/trans/neg images in the range of 50-80,000
    maybe more. I know how they have been used over the last 5 years. (Not
    much) How they have deteriorate over time.

    so as of interest.

    In your collection of slides/transparencies what percentage have you
    used in the last 3 years?

    When was the last time you accessed then.

    Do you have them all drum scanned and cataloged so there readily
    available for use.

    Things have changed.
     
    Billy, May 16, 2009
    #12
  13. kerravon

    Mr.T Guest

    Who said anything about 500? ONE is sufficient to prove your claim wrong.

    Nope, my slide scanner has allowed me to produce many good enlargements.

    As I said, what is acceptable for your purposes has nothing to do with the
    OP's requirements.

    So that $100 scanner you recommend as "sufficient", was actually not
    sufficient for you?
    (me either)
    Not many, just enough to justify a decent scanner.

    Nope, I wouldn't need a slide scanner if I had them all drum scanned. I
    seriously doubt anyone with a reasonable collection will ever do that. The
    point is to scan all those worth saving, at a quality sufficient for *your*
    current and future needs. A $100 film scanner may be all YOU need, and yet
    it appears it was not.
    Sure, and the OP knows what he wants and is prepared to spend better than
    you it seems.
    (although he has gone strangely silent, so the whole argument appears to be
    moot)

    MrT.
     
    Mr.T, May 16, 2009
    #13
  14. kerravon

    Billy Guest

    Mr.T wrote:

    Dribble deleted

    Not worth the discussion.

    No wonder this NG is stuffed.
     
    Billy, May 16, 2009
    #14
  15. kerravon

    Dyna Soar Guest

    Translation... Mr T whipped Billy's arse!
    ROFL.
     
    Dyna Soar, May 16, 2009
    #15
  16. They seem to have a bunch at varying prices -

    http://www.digitalcamerawarehouse.com.au/category511_1.htm

    --

    - KRudd at his finest.

    "The Labour Party is corrupt beyond redemption!"
    - Labour hasbeen Mark Latham in a moment of honest clarity.

    "This is the recession we had to have!"
    - Paul Keating explaining why he gave Australia another Labour recession.

    "Silly old bugger!"
    - Well known ACTU pisspot and sometime Labour prime minister Bob Hawke
    responding to a pensioner who dared ask for more.

    "By 1990, no child will live in poverty"
    - Bob Hawke again, desperate to win another election.

    "A billion trees ..."
    - Borke, pissed as a newt again.

    "Well may we say 'God save the Queen' because nothing will save the governor
    general!"
    - Egotistical shithead and pompous fuckwit E.G. Whitlam whining about his
    appointee for Governor General John Kerr.
     
    Dr. Sir John Howard, AC, WSCMoF, May 17, 2009
    #16
  17. kerravon

    k Guest

    | Mr.T wrote:
    |
    | Dribble deleted

    got to say, T is very argumentative, and falls to denigrating people at
    almost every turn.
     
    k, May 17, 2009
    #17
  18. kerravon

    Mr.T Guest

    Maybe you should research the difference between "denigrating someone" "ad
    hominem attacks" etc. and simply disagreeing with their line of argument.
    You will search long and hard for an instance where I have made a personal
    attack, except in response to one.
    However I see nothing wrong with disagreeing with someone's point of view,
    if you do then perhaps Usenet is not the best place for you?

    MrT.
     
    Mr.T, May 17, 2009
    #18
  19. kerravon

    Noons Guest

    Mr.T wrote,on my timestamp of 16/05/2009 9:22 PM:
    Wrong. Two. He said: "slides". That means two at least.

    Around 80% here.



    LOL! Was that a troll or what?
     
    Noons, May 17, 2009
    #19
  20. kerravon

    Pete D Guest

    Apart from the fact that you failed to answer my question the OP did not
    specify what the final output needs to be used for, without that any advice
    is only speculation and many answers may well be suitable. I note that the
    OP has failed to give any more guidance when offered suggestions so can only
    assume that they really were just trolling.

    Cheers.

    Pete
     
    Pete D, May 17, 2009
    #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.