Slides or Prints for scanning ?

Discussion in '35mm Cameras' started by Quest0029, Jan 8, 2004.

  1. Quest0029

    Quest0029 Guest

    Which is the best way to go for scanning, slides or negatives?
    I usually shoot slides but for this project I'd be interested
    in using negatives for the better latitude, I'm shooting
    in low light with long exposure times.
    Thanks for any reponses!
    Quest0029, Jan 8, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  2. Quest0029

    Tony Spadaro Guest

    That would depend a lot upon the scanner. NikonScan 2 was poor at colour
    negatives but 3 is very good at them. You might try asking about the
    sepcific model scanner you own on the scanner forums.
    If VueScan is available fo the model you own it might work better than
    your current software. I used VueScan when I had NikonScan 2 and 2.5. Though
    not perfect it gave much better colour than the Nikon program.
    Tony Spadaro, Jan 8, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  3. Quest0029

    Alan Browne Guest

    A well expsosed slide will scan very well on the latest (about last 2
    years) scanners. Older scanners fare better on thin (slightly over exp)

    Some slide brands such as E100S show grain artifacts / grain aliasing
    but it's no big deal.

    Negatives usually scan well but may need more color adjustment. Portra
    160NC scans effortlessly.

    In low light and assuming you end up with very dense areas on slide
    will scan well on high dmax scanners. On negatives, no real problem.
    Alan Browne, Jan 8, 2004
  4. Quest0029

    Thom Guest

    I disagree totally. It has nothing to do with the scanner. A neg or
    tranny will allow a scanner to suck in the totaly amount of
    information while a print or any reflective art only has 1/10th the
    information than a tranny or neg has.

    the ORIGINAL is always what you should scan

    Thom, Jan 10, 2004
  5. Quest0029

    Tony Spadaro Guest

    In fact, before I got VueScan I would have been better off scanning prints
    as my refelctive scanner usually got relatively reasonable colour, whereas
    the need for extensive colour correction with the original Nikon software
    was pretty much a killer. VueScan solved that problem until Nikon came up
    with a better version of their software.
    Tony Spadaro, Jan 10, 2004
  6. Quest0029

    Rafe B. Guest

    A perfectly exposed slide that's not too
    contrasty is a cinch to scan and will give
    the best results.

    Of course, with slides you've got less
    exposure lattitude so you're much more
    likely to end up with blocked up shadow
    detail or blown out highlights, and no
    scanner is going to fix that. You're also
    more likely to run into the scanner's
    dynamic range limits with slide film.

    Negative film gets around the lattitude
    problem, so if properly exposed will
    reveal detail throughout the tonal range
    when scanned. And negatives won't strain
    against the dynamic range of a good film

    The primary downside of negatives is that
    they have more grain than slides, at least
    in the ISO 100 range. "Inverting" the image
    is not a big deal; most film scanners handle
    this pretty well.

    I shoot mostly low-speed color negative
    films and in general find them quite easy
    to scan. Reala is my favorite.

    rafe b.
    Rafe B., Jan 10, 2004
  7. Quest0029

    Jim Guest

    The original question didn't mention prints. It was which is
    better trannys or negatives?


    * Check-out my web site at: *
    * landscape and travel photographs, featuring sunsets *
    Jim, Jan 10, 2004
    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.