Professional Web Applications Themes

Film to digital - Photography

Is there anything to be said for shooting with a 35mm film camera and letting whoever does the processing put the images on a CD for you? I realize your digital camera eliminates this step, but what are the pros and cons, and when would this method be preferred, if at all? Thanks. Sheldon net...

  1. #1

    Default Film to digital

    Is there anything to be said for shooting with a 35mm film camera and
    letting whoever does the processing put the images on a CD for you?

    I realize your digital camera eliminates this step, but what are the pros
    and cons, and when would this method be preferred, if at all?

    Thanks.

    Sheldon
    net


    Sheldon Guest

  2. #2

    Default Re: Film to digital

    Sheldon wrote: 

    Most store made CD's are of fairly poor resolution v. what is possible
    with most home film scanners.
     

    A good digital camera is better in almost all cases than the CD's that
    are provided by most film developers.

    The exception is of course service bureau's that provide drum scans...
    which are quite expensive.

    I'll be getting some MF film scans done soon on Fuji Frontier ... I'll
    report the results, but from what others have said I expect to be
    disappointed.

    Cheers,
    Alan


    --
    -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
    -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
    -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
    -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
    Alan Guest

  3. #3

    Default Re: Film to digital


    "Alan Browne-" <ca> wrote in message
    news:ct0rsj$bd7$gazeta.pl... 
    >
    > Most store made CD's are of fairly poor resolution v. what is possible
    > with most home film scanners.

    >
    > A good digital camera is better in almost all cases than the CD's that are
    > provided by most film developers.
    >
    > The exception is of course service bureau's that provide drum scans...
    > which are quite expensive.
    >
    > I'll be getting some MF film scans done soon on Fuji Frontier ... I'll
    > report the results, but from what others have said I expect to be
    > disappointed.
    >
    > Cheers,
    > Alan[/ref]

    That said, if I was going to scan my own film, better to use negatives or
    slides (ISO being equal)?

    Thanks,

    Sheldon


    Sheldon Guest

  4. #4

    Default Re: Film to digital

    Sheldon wrote:
    That said, if I was going to scan my own film, better to use negatives or 

    Not sure I understand that. You do scan negatives and slides. The
    process is pretty much the same (You have to tell the scan software it
    is a negative or a slide, but other than that...)

    "ISO being equal"? If you mean, "is digital ISO the same as film ISO?"
    then yes (for the most part, there are some subtle differences).

    Cheers,
    Alan


    --
    -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
    -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
    -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
    -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
    Alan Guest

  5. #5

    Default Re: Film to digital

    Let me rephrase the question, and this is probably the wrong group. If you
    are going to substitute shooting 35mm for digital, and scan the results to
    digital yourself, is it better to use negative film or slide film?

    Sheldon

    "Alan Browne-" <ca> wrote in message
    news:ct0ujd$oal$gazeta.pl... 
    >
    > Not sure I understand that. You do scan negatives and slides. The
    > process is pretty much the same (You have to tell the scan software it is
    > a negative or a slide, but other than that...)
    >
    > "ISO being equal"? If you mean, "is digital ISO the same as film ISO?"
    > then yes (for the most part, there are some subtle differences).
    >
    > Cheers,
    > Alan
    >
    >
    > --
    > -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
    > -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
    > -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
    > -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.[/ref]


    Sheldon Guest

  6. #6

    Default Re: Film to digital

    Alan Browne- wrote:

     


    You will be.

    I had hoped to use this service and continue shooting 645 using this for
    "proofs" but the results were awful. This was even a camera store lab which
    normally does decent prints, the CD wasn't even CLOSE to being useable for
    anything. Shame as the idea was sound, seems they just put the machine on
    autopilot if you aren't getting prints and blame it on your computer if
    they look like crap.


    --

    Stacey
    Stacey Guest

  7. #7

    Default Re: Film to digital

    Sheldon wrote:
     

    I'd say slide. First off you have an original to go by and second you don't
    have to deal with all the various "color masks" that while they all look
    orange, need different adjustments to get decent color balance. I haven't
    done a bunch of this but have scanned some 4X5 negatives and chromes and
    the chromes were much easier to deal with.
    --

    Stacey
    Stacey Guest

  8. #8

    Default [OT] Re: Film to digital

    Sheldon wrote:
     

    Generally it is easier (and faster) to scan slide film. Good slide films like
    Velvia (both), Provia, Sensia, E100VS, E100G, Elitechrome 100 and others scan
    well. Usually the color is bang on if the exposure was correct.

    Sensia 100: http://www.pbase.com/shootin/image/38733609
    http://www.pbase.com/shootin/image/38208166
    Velvia (50): http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=1231406&size=lg
    E100S: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=662531&size=lg

    Some slide films, like E100S, scan with an unusual grain aliasing effect that is
    not very pleasant. OTOH, this does not show very much (or at all) in prints.

    If you are not experienced at shooting slide film, however, the extra latitude
    of negative color film will be more forgiving to you.

    Some negative film scans very nicely. Oddly enough, the great el-cheapo Kodak
    Max 400 scans very well in my experience. Negative films sometimes scan with
    odd color rendition and it can be a challenge to correct.

    For color, Kodak Portra 160NC scans great. (expose the film at 100, not 160,
    develop normally).

    This isn't the place for this... learn more at news:comp.periphs.scanners

    Cheers,
    Alan.

    --
    -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
    -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
    -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
    -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
    Alan Guest

  9. #9

    Default Re: Film to digital

    Stacey wrote:
     
    > You will be.
    >
    > I had hoped to use this service and continue shooting 645 using this for
    > "proofs" but the results were awful. This was even a camera store lab which
    > normally does decent prints, the CD wasn't even CLOSE to being useable for
    > anything. Shame as the idea was sound, seems they just put the machine on
    > autopilot if you aren't getting prints and blame it on your computer if
    > they look like crap.[/ref]

    Well, at two different places I have a good rapport with the owners/operators,
    so we'll see how much 'improvement' can be made if they come back like crap.
    I'm so reluctant to find out that this task has been due for over two months
    (we've discussed before).

    Cheers,
    Alan


    --
    -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
    -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
    -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
    -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
    Alan Guest

  10. #10

    Default Re: Film to digital

    In article <com>,
    Sheldon <net> wrote: 

    That depends on the scanner (and, to some extent, to the film).

    Each approach has drawbacks.

    With negative film, you have the problem of the orange mask, and the
    fact that different films have rather different colour profiles.

    Reversal film is very simple from a colour standpoint, but can be a
    problem on low-end scanners which can't handle the range of densities.

    With an 8-bit scanner I'd suggest staying with negative film, and
    see if you can get a film profile for your scanner (or use a third
    party software solution such as Ed Hamrick's VueScan package).

    With a 10-bit (or, preferably, 12-bit) scanner, you should be OK
    with slide films.

    On an ISO-for-ISO comparison I found that a good high-resolution
    slide film (in my case Fuji Provia 100F) produced better scans
    than I was able to get from negative film (Kodak Supra 100).
    I also preferred the artifacts from dye clouds to film grain.
    John Guest

  11. #11

    Default Re: Film to digital

    In article <com>, net
    says... 
    >>
    >> Most store made CD's are of fairly poor resolution v. what is possible
    >> with most home film scanners.
    >> 
    >>
    >> A good digital camera is better in almost all cases than the CD's that are
    >> provided by most film developers.
    >>
    >> The exception is of course service bureau's that provide drum scans...
    >> which are quite expensive.
    >>
    >> I'll be getting some MF film scans done soon on Fuji Frontier ... I'll
    >> report the results, but from what others have said I expect to be
    >> disappointed.
    >>
    >> Cheers,
    >> Alan[/ref]
    >
    >That said, if I was going to scan my own film, better to use negatives or
    >slides (ISO being equal)?
    >
    >Thanks,
    >
    >Sheldon[/ref]

    I agree with Alan's statement to the original post. As to your question now, a
    very general and basic answer, posed on the assumption that you have good
    software with your scanner to handle either, would be: if the highlights are
    the most important part of the image, then shoot neg film, but if the shadows
    are the most important part, then shoot transparency film. Beyond the
    highlight/shadow consideration, there is probably a little less work with
    transparency than negative, but otherwise they are equal.

    Hunt

    Hunt Guest

  12. #12

    Default Re: Film to digital

    John Francis <com> wrote:
     
     

    There's a trick I'd like to recommend: over-expose slightly. This
    lifts shadow detail out of the toe of the density curve of the film.
    Only a slight adjustment is required. I usually expose ISO 100 film
    at ISO 80, and this gives good results on a Coolscan 8000.

    Andrew.
    andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid Guest

  13. Moderated Post

    Default Re: Film to digital

    Removed by Administrator
    John Guest
    Moderated Post

  14. #14

    Default Re: Film to digital

    I've had very good luck with shooting 35mm film and having it scanned
    in at 300ppi then printing out at up to 20"x30". The color and
    sharpness are quite good.

    The scanning is done on a Nikon CoolScan and the film I use is Velvia
    100.

    Chris
    www.hotchilistudios.com
    com

    Chris Guest

  15. Moderated Post

    Default Re: Film to digital

    Removed by Administrator
    jfitz Guest
    Moderated Post

  16. Moderated Post

    Default Re: Film to digital

    Removed by Administrator
    andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid Guest
    Moderated Post

Similar Threads

  1. Digital or Film
    By Steve in forum Photography
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: September 5th, 04:57 AM
  2. Film vs. Digital
    By Bob Ashby in forum Photography
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: August 1st, 07:25 AM
  3. Digital v Film
    By Simon Marchini in forum Photography
    Replies: 184
    Last Post: July 20th, 11:57 PM
  4. Film vs digital
    By Per Inge Oestmoen in forum Photography
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: June 27th, 10:41 PM
  5. Digital Film / Silicon Film(tm) - for real ?
    By Ken Chandler in forum Photography
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: June 26th, 10:30 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139