In the sixties, the only way I could afford taking pictures was doing my own processing. Much better than the commercial shops.
Ken On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 9:45 PM Russell Senior <russ...@personaltelco.net> wrote: > Some film processing is better than others. I have some excellent prints > (and negatives) from early 1950s Germany, taken with a Leica by my dad and > processed by a local camera shop there. He reported that the processing in > the US was so bad when he got back to the States, that he sold the camera. > > On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 5:44 PM, Tomas Kuchta < > tomas.kuchta.li...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > I would encourage you to scan a few negatives/transparencies, measure the > > time it takes and extrapolate to cover all your negatives/positives. > > > > When I did that years ago, I quickly realized that scanners are just too > > slow for what I wanted to do in a time given to me by mother nature - by > > couple of orders of magnitude, actually. Plus the scan quality was not > that > > great either. > > > > The solutions to speed things up are either: > > a) adapter for your digital camera + automation. That way you can scan > and > > postprocess hundreds of pictures a day instead of a few with slow > scanners. > > With half decent DSLR, you will get high quality scans. > > b) send the stash out for someone else to scan them. There are a few big > > and decent companies still doing it. That is what I have eventually > settled > > on. The price is good and the quality is decisively better than from a > > desktop scanner with transparency adapter. > > > > Until I went through this scanning discovery, I naively believed in great > > quality of film photography compared to digital. I was so wrong - today's > > digital imaging is vastly superior, especially to old/aged films. > > > > I hope that you find my comments useful, > > Tomas > > > > On Wed, Jun 27, 2018, 11:54 AM Russell Senior <russ...@personaltelco.net > > > > wrote: > > > > > There is a guy in Seattle named Andrew Filer, who I met in a > > > then-hackerspace called Metrix:Create who modified a Kodak Carousel > > > projector in such a way as to backlight the slides (reduced wattage of > > the > > > bulb, replaced the heat shield with frosted glass), basically used the > > > projector as a slide advancing robot, removed the lens, and aimed a > > digital > > > SLR with a macro lens back at the slide and photographed the slide. > With > > > some simple transistor circuits, you could automate the camera's > shutter > > > release and the slide advance. You could do a whole tray of slides in > a > > > few minutes with very little supervision. > > > > > > You need a digital SLR and a macro lens, preferably one with autofocus > > (as > > > I discovered). But orders of magnitude less tedious than a flatbed > > scanner > > > where you manually loaded slides into a holder, 12 at a time. > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 11:09 AM, Denis Heidtmann < > > > denis.heidtm...@gmail.com > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Russell, > > > > > > > > I would be interested in the method. Picture of a screen? > > > > > > > > -Denis > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 11:03 AM, Russell Senior < > > > > russ...@personaltelco.net> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Gotcha. I don't have any better solutions for that. > > > > > > > > > > If they were slides, I'd suggest the method I used in Seattle a few > > > years > > > > > ago, that went through about 3000+ slides in kodak projector > > carousels > > > is > > > > > an afternoon. Automation++. > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 10:32 AM, Michael Rasmussen < > > > mich...@jamhome.us> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Of primary interest are 2 1/4 x 2 3/4 (6x9cm) negatives from my > > > > > > grandparents. After that 35mm negatives. > > > > > > > > > > > > I was entrusted to my grandparents' negatives and am feeling a > > > > > > responsibility to scan them into digital files for my relatives. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2018-06-27 10:10, Russell Senior wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >> What kind of transparencies? If they are 35mm slides, and lots > of > > > > them, > > > > > >> there is a better way. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 9:00 AM, Michael Rasmussen < > > > > mich...@jamhome.us> > > > > > >> wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > >> In another group, it was suggested I try Vuescan from > > > > > >>> https://www.hamrick.com/ > > > > > >>> The free Linux download untars to three binaries. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> It just works. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> Now to, when I have time, figure out the issue with xsane. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> On 2018-06-26 18:37, Michael Rasmussen wrote: > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> I've acquired an Epson V500 flatbed scanner. After immediate > > > install > > > > of > > > > > >>>> xsane and the Epson iscan drivers scanning does not work. > I've > > > > added > > > > > >>>> myself to the scanner group and done a bit of unproductive > > > googling. > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> The sympton can be summed up: > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> michael@camper:~$ scanimage -L > > > > > >>>> device `epson:libusb:001:006' is a Epson flatbed scanner > > > > > >>>> michael@camper:~$ scanimage -T > > > > > >>>> scanimage: rounded value of br-x from -32768 to -32768 > > > > > >>>> scanimage: rounded value of br-y from -32768 to -32768 > > > > > >>>> scanimage: sane_start: Invalid argument > > > > > >>>> michael@camper:~$ > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> If you have a cluestick on what needs to be done, I'm ready > for > > a > > > > > whack. > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Michael Rasmussen, Portland Oregon > > > > > > Be Appropriate && Follow Your Curiosity > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > PLUG mailing list > > > > > > PLUG@pdxlinux.org > > > > > > http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > PLUG mailing list > > > > > PLUG@pdxlinux.org > > > > > http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > PLUG mailing list > > > > PLUG@pdxlinux.org > > > > http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > PLUG mailing list > > > PLUG@pdxlinux.org > > > http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > PLUG mailing list > > PLUG@pdxlinux.org > > http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug > > > _______________________________________________ > PLUG mailing list > PLUG@pdxlinux.org > http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug > _______________________________________________ PLUG mailing list PLUG@pdxlinux.org http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug