Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
I have been scanning film since the early 1990s and have had quite a few scanners, both negative and flatbed, over the years. Since about 2006, I've owned and used the Nikon Coolscan IV and Coolscan V extensively. Either of them with the automated 35mm feeder can scan a 6 frame strip very effectively in batch mode using VueScan. But… The process is *NEVER* fast. A thirty six exposure roll is an hour or two worth of work. A thirty six exposure roll of mounted slides is about four times that because you can only load them one at a time. Add time if you select individually which frames you want to scan, and if you want perfectly scanned, usable, balanced JPEGs to pop out of the scanner with no further editing required—lots of time. It is far more practical if you have several dozens or even hundreds of frames to scan is to wrap them up and send them off to someone like http://www.scancafe.com … They'll do as good a job as you will 90-98% of the time and whatever they charge is a FAR better use of your money and time than buying a scanner.
My grief with scancafe is that it costs twice as much to get tiffs as it does to get jpegs. Sure, I'm mostly interested in the quick scan to see which photos are worth going deep and getting good scans, but it's no more work to scan them as Tiff as jpeg.
Buy and use a scanner when you have specific things that you want to do with film photography that requires your personal control of the scanning process. Buy a scanning service when you want to convert an archive of older film images to digital in order that you can see them and share them. G
-- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com (postbox on min4est) http://red4est.com/lrc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
