Bob Janes wrote:I've tried the route of shooting nagatives with a macro lens using a sheet of perspex and backlighting with flash - it is very quick (and is the only way I have of doing medium format negatives), but it can be very difficult to get a full tonal range - I find my Scan Dual II with VuScan gets more out of the hadows and highlights.
bakubo wrote:Dusty, that scan of a Kodachrome 25 slide dupe looks pretty good. It has a pretty strong blue cast that could be fixed to make it look even better, I think. I suppose the original Kodachrome 8 slides are lost?
Dusty wrote:My cousins - who always seemed to depend upon me for taking photos after their Dad 'retired', dumped everything into a big box.
Mark K wrote:Thank you for starting this thread. My project did not go well. Scanning using Vuescan on my Dimage 5400 creates a file around 220Mb and the process is painfully slow.
bakubo wrote:The quality of the raw files from the 10mp tiny sensor in my Canon S95 are so much better in every way. Although some may say the dynamic range is less, maybe a lot less, than color negative film I have found that in practical terms it is much better. As long as you are scanning to convert the analog film to a digital file then the result, in my experience, is less usable dynamic range than what I can get by shooting in raw with a tiny sensor digital. I can shoot for the highlights and bring up the shadows with the digital and still get better results than scanning color negatives. The color is also so much better it isn't even worth comparing. The noise/grain is also so much better it isn't worth comparing. The S95 at ISO 1600 or 3200 is probably better than scanning ASA 100 color negative film. Actually, even jpegs are better too. Another actually: my old 5mp Minolta D7i is better. I would much rather have a 5mp jpeg from the D7i than a 10mp scan of a color negative (also a color slide). Oh, the 10mp file from the scanner probably has no more than 5mp of real, useful data in it for most color negative scans since they are pretty noisy/grainy. The Scan Elite is a pretty good film scanner (cost me $1000 several years ago) and Vuescan gets even more out of it. I always scan using multi-sampling to reduce noise a bit more. A different scanner in some cases might be marginally better, but not much. It is just the limitations of converting analog film to digital.
Happy New Year and Best Wishes for 2014!
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests