Professional Web Applications Themes

Tales of a $30US camera.... - Photography

Took the Minolta HiMatic 7 out for its first run today. Shot through the crowd in an out-of-doors antique show. Got the film processed "develop only" and went home. Now I've got an interesting problem: Is it going to take a Minolta Scan Elite 5400 to dig out all the information on the negatives, or will a Nikon LS4000 do the job? I'm almost positive that this flatbed scanner (Epson Perfection 3200) isn't getting it all by a long shot. When I get around to lens testing, this one will definitely be in the queue!! Bill Tallman...

  1. #1

    Default Tales of a $30US camera....

    Took the Minolta HiMatic 7 out for its first run today. Shot through the
    crowd in an out-of-doors antique show. Got the film processed "develop
    only" and went home.

    Now I've got an interesting problem: Is it going to take a Minolta Scan
    Elite 5400 to dig out all the information on the negatives, or will a Nikon
    LS4000 do the job? I'm almost positive that this flatbed scanner (Epson
    Perfection 3200) isn't getting it all by a long shot.

    When I get around to lens testing, this one will definitely be in the
    queue!!

    Bill Tallman

    William Guest

  2. #2

    Default Re: Tales of a $30US camera....

    "William D. Tallman" <com> wrote 

    It is an imponderable, and worthy only of philosophical flatulence,
    i.e. to pass gas while thinking the unthinkable. Until computers
    are equipped with smell-o-matic I can't give you the answer you deserve.

    But, in the mean time, why not order a CD with your developing.

    Message|Block sender|Would you like to remove all messages|Yes

    Aaahhh.

    --
    Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio netcom.com
    Consulting Engineer: Electronics; Informatics; Photonics.
    Nicholas Guest

  3. #3

    Default Re: Tales of a $30US camera....



    William D. Tallman wrote: 

    Either the Minolta or the Nikon will do a very good job. Extracting
    "all" of the information is unlikely, so it really comes to how large
    you need to print or diplay and at how many dpi.

    Cheers,
    Alan.
     

    Alan Guest

  4. #4

    Default Re: Tales of a $30US camera....



    Nicholas O. Lindan wrote:
     



    Take your ball and go home.

    Alan Guest

  5. #5

    Default Re: Tales of a $30US camera....

    Nicholas O. Lindan wrote:
     
    >
    > It is an imponderable, and worthy only of philosophical flatulence,
    > i.e. to pass gas while thinking the unthinkable. Until computers
    > are equipped with smell-o-matic I can't give you the answer you deserve.[/ref]

    Good grief! A tyrannical two-year-old tossing a temper tantrum! LOL!!!!!!
     

    Do you have any idea of the quality of scans usually provided on CDs? I
    don't, but I've heard that they are abominable unless one uses a custom
    lab. Rather do it myself.

    Bill Tallman

    William Guest

  6. #6

    Default Re: Tales of a $30US camera....

    Alan Browne wrote:
     
    >
    > Either the Minolta or the Nikon will do a very good job. Extracting
    > "all" of the information is unlikely, so it really comes to how large
    > you need to print or diplay and at how many dpi.[/ref]

    LOL!!! Yep, I suppose so. And it's largely a matter of subjective choice
    to decide how much information is really there....

    The issue is how much I can crop the image taken. Usually, prints want
    300dpi, regardless of size, because s like myself compulsively stick
    their noses on the print surface and grumble if it doesn't look like it was
    a print of an 8x10 neg!! Never found it succesful to observe the
    limitation of distance of viewing on my own prints... <grin>

    With a 45mm lens, one can expect to want to do some occasionally extensive
    cropping, I would think.

    Bill Tallman

    William Guest

  7. #7

    Default Re: Tales of a $30US camera....



    William D. Tallman wrote: 
     
    >
    >
    > LOL!!! Yep, I suppose so. And it's largely a matter of subjective choice
    > to decide how much information is really there....
    >
    > The issue is how much I can crop the image taken. Usually, prints want
    > 300dpi, regardless of size, because s like myself compulsively stick
    > their noses on the print surface and grumble if it doesn't look like it was
    > a print of an 8x10 neg!! Never found it succesful to observe the
    > limitation of distance of viewing on my own prints... <grin>
    >
    > With a 45mm lens, one can expect to want to do some occasionally extensive
    > cropping, I would think.
    >
    > Bill Tallman
    >[/ref]

    That's a problem with the way we see our printed results. I shot a
    stage show at a Karoke bar a few months back. Made for some very nice
    prints up to 8x10. The owner had a friend at a major paper print it on
    a special printer to about 60" high. You can imagine the quality up
    close. But everyone loves it... and from 15' back it DOES look great.

    Cheers,
    Alan.

    Alan Guest

  8. #8

    Default Re: Tales of a $30US camera....



    William D. Tallman wrote: 
    >
    >
    > Good on'ya!
    >
    > I'm curious: is it usually viewed from 15' or is it available for close
    > inspection by the viewer? Does anyone really notice the lack of sharpness
    > at that size? I suspect most people expect it and factor it out, while we
    > tend to cringe.... I guess that's a price we pay for our otherwise
    > enhanced ability to appreciate and enjoy things visual through photography.
    >
    > Bill Tallman
    >[/ref]

    Most people look at it from about 10 - 20' away, but there's always
    someone giving it a closer inspection and then looking perhaps
    disappointed... Have to go back and see if it's still up...

    Cheers,
    Alan

    Alan Guest

  9. #9

    Default Re: Tales of a $30US camera....

    William D. Tallman writes:
     

    You need to indicate the FILM that you used in order to answer this
    question.

    An LS-4000 will do the job for most films with very high efficiency. If
    you shot handheld, you probably don't need to go any higher, anyway.
     

    Film has a gradual loss of image information as you scan at higher and
    higher resolutions, but there is no fixed cutoff point. However, the
    more you increase the resolution, the smaller the increment of
    additional information you get with each increase. You get a lot more
    going from 2000 to 4000 dpi than you get in going from 4000 to 8000 dpi.

    --
    Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
    Mxsmanic Guest

  10. #10

    Default Re: Tales of a $30US camera....

    Mxsmanic wrote:

    <sorry... haven't been watching this thread as I'd assumed it was
    finished.>
     
    >
    > You need to indicate the FILM that you used in order to answer this
    > question.[/ref]

    Generic Kodak ASA 100.
     
    >
    > Film has a gradual loss of image information as you scan at higher and
    > higher resolutions, but there is no fixed cutoff point. However, the
    > more you increase the resolution, the smaller the increment of
    > additional information you get with each increase. You get a lot more
    > going from 2000 to 4000 dpi than you get in going from 4000 to 8000 dpi.[/ref]

    That sounds right. Thanks.

    I made the mistake of not adding the indicator that the OP was
    semi-humorous. Guess what I was trying to share was that this "thutty
    dollah wondah" actually produced some quite sharp negatives, somewhat to my
    astonishment.

    Appears to be some truth to the assertion that $$$ != quality all the time.
    For me, at this point, cameras are also toys as well as tools, and the
    HiMatic is a neat tool as well as a neat toy!

    Thanks again, all.

    Bill Tallman
    William Guest

  11. #11

    Default Re: Tales of a $30US camera....

    William D. Tallman writes:
     

    I've never heard of it. What was on the box or film cartridge? Or,
    failing that, what is on the edges of the negatives?
     

    With proper use and processing, even disposables don't do that bad.

    --
    Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
    Mxsmanic Guest

Similar Threads

  1. camera.get for an outdoor camera ( not a webcam )
    By dsdsdsdsd in forum Macromedia Flash Flashcom
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: September 5th, 03:44 PM
  2. no camera
    By hwood82490@roadrunner.com in forum Macromedia Flash Player
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: January 3rd, 08:30 PM
  3. What meg camera should I buy?
    By uncle Tom in forum Adobe Photoshop Elements
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: August 23rd, 11:21 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