Re: 35mm Scanning Prices?
the base level of quality worth my time is $1 per scan at 3kx2k. if i require quality, it costs me $20 per scan. that is why it was trivial to justify spending $2K on a scanner 35mm film scanner. it took 6 months to pay for itself in scanning my slides. at the costs you are quoting, you will be lucky to get scans of your slides/negatives without them being destroyed in the process. Herb... - Original Message - From: "Don Sanderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2004 12:15 PM Subject: RE: 35mm Scanning Prices? > I do indeed... > > Don > > > -Original Message- > > From: graywolf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2004 11:02 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: 35mm Scanning Prices? > > > > > > For $5.15/hr you expect knowledge "AND" experience?
RE: 35mm Scanning Prices?
Picture CD's are mostly useless to me due to the low resolution of scanning. I've used Photo CD's (5 levels of resolution) over the years with very good results - YMMV - from a local source. My understanding from that local source is that Kodak is no longer supporting the equipment that they originally brought out to do Photo CDs. My local source use to charge me approx $1.75/scan based on volume of scanned slides. I've since moved on to the Nikon Supercoolscan with great results and have almost paid for the scanner based on the volume of slides I've scanned. -Original Message- From: Markus Maurer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: 35mm Scanning Prices? Hi Don I ordered two Picture CD's lately at different stores. They are not the original Kodak ones in their format. The images are scanned at 1536x1024 Pixel and in JPG format :-( On the other side, they only cost about $6 here in Switzerland, the original Kodak Picture CD was more expensive... Are the ones you ordered from Kodak and in what format? Greetings Markus > So far have only found the one place that does better than "Picture CD" > quality. > I'm pretty surprised by this, if a shop can only scan at 1600x1200 how on > earth are they making 16x20 and larger prints? > > PeoplePC Online A better way to Internet http://www.peoplepc.com
RE: 35mm Scanning Prices?
Hi Don I ordered two Picture CD's lately at different stores. They are not the original Kodak ones in their format. The images are scanned at 1536x1024 Pixel and in JPG format :-( On the other side, they only cost about $6 here in Switzerland, the original Kodak Picture CD was more expensive... Are the ones you ordered from Kodak and in what format? Greetings Markus > So far have only found the one place that does better than "Picture CD" > quality. > I'm pretty surprised by this, if a shop can only scan at 1600x1200 how on > earth are they making 16x20 and larger prints? > >
RE: 35mm Scanning Prices?
Just tried SilverFast, far and away the best results so far! I was surprised that when you download SilverFast they give you quite a quiz as to your scanner type. The copy I got was specifically for the PF-1800 AFL! I scanned and printed a crop of just the cats nose and eyes to 8x10, looks nearly as good as an optical print. May not work this well for all scanners, but appears to be very well suited to the 1800. Thanks for suggesting it. VueScan required the manufacturers driver to be loaded. Didn't do very well with the 1800, high contrast and didn't seem to be able to get the colors very close at all. Now all I have to do is cough up the bucks so the watermarks go away. :-/ Example: http://www.donsauction.com/PDML/SF-4.jpg Don > -Original Message- > From: Lon Williamson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Sunday, July 18, 2004 8:19 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: 35mm Scanning Prices? > > If you want to try third party software with it, > I'd recommend SilverFast over Vuescan. I've tried > both with my PF3600. > > -Lon
RE: 35mm Scanning Prices?
There are several messages in this thread that cover what I've gone thru so far. I am now using CyberViewX rather than CyberView35, it makes a WORLD of difference. VueScan wouldn't run until I upgraded to CyberViewX. I'm just now playing with VueScan, I'll check out SilverFast too!. Thanks! Don > -Original Message- > From: Lon Williamson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Sunday, July 18, 2004 8:19 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: 35mm Scanning Prices? > > > Are you using Cyberview? And are you scanning negs or > 'chrome? That scanner is not going to scan into the > shadows on slide film, and is not going to give good > color balance with neg film unless you post process > with an editor. > > However, using post processing with neg film should > give good results, provided that you come to accept > that the "grain" you see on-screen will happen with > any scanner, including higher-resolution models. > > If you want to try third party software with it, > I'd recommend SilverFast over Vuescan. I've tried > both with my PF3600. > > -Lon > > Don Sanderson wrote: > > snip...Does anyone else have the PF1800? How are your results? >
Re: 35mm Scanning Prices?
Are you using Cyberview? And are you scanning negs or 'chrome? That scanner is not going to scan into the shadows on slide film, and is not going to give good color balance with neg film unless you post process with an editor. However, using post processing with neg film should give good results, provided that you come to accept that the "grain" you see on-screen will happen with any scanner, including higher-resolution models. If you want to try third party software with it, I'd recommend SilverFast over Vuescan. I've tried both with my PF3600. -Lon Don Sanderson wrote: snip...Does anyone else have the PF1800? How are your results?
Re: 35mm Scanning Prices?
almost all of the features in Elements but not in CS are in the Elements equivalent of actions. the crucial difference is that only Adobe knows how to create those features of Elements while everyone can create actions without Adobe's help. Herb - Original Message - From: "Tanya Mayer Photography" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2004 11:05 PM Subject: RE: 35mm Scanning Prices? > > Actually, ERN, that's not exactly true, the fill flash function, and the > "recipes", and quite a number of other features (mainly "shortcut" type > stuff, and fun things like borders etc) are not available in CS or any other > version except for Elements, to my knowledge.
RE: 35mm Scanning Prices?
Tanja said: > Actually, ERN, that's not exactly true, the fill flash function, and the > "recipes", and quite a number of other features (mainly "shortcut" type > stuff, and fun things like borders etc) are not available in CS or any other > version except for Elements, to my knowledge. > Feel free, anyone to correct me if I am wrong, cause I do miss some of those > fun things from Elements that I don't have in CS (although, if I wasn't so > lazy, I am sure that I could design some actions for most of them anyways). replying to my: > Well, everything in Elements is also in the full version, right; while the > reverse is not true -- so a book on the whole thing should surely cover > everything in Elements. Oh. Well, I was just speculating. Thanks for the correction. ERN
Re: 35mm Scanning Prices?
- Original Message - From: "Don Sanderson" Subject: RE: 35mm Scanning Prices? > When I got my first SLR B&W was all I shot for about 5 years! > TOTAL CONTROL! > Pretty soon I got into toners in a big way, took a while to realise I'd > shifted my interest to color. > Now with the people and pets thing I like my colors! > > Ever though about hand colouring? William Robb
RE: 35mm Scanning Prices?
Actually, ERN, that's not exactly true, the fill flash function, and the "recipes", and quite a number of other features (mainly "shortcut" type stuff, and fun things like borders etc) are not available in CS or any other version except for Elements, to my knowledge. Feel free, anyone to correct me if I am wrong, cause I do miss some of those fun things from Elements that I don't have in CS (although, if I wasn't so lazy, I am sure that I could design some actions for most of them anyways). tan. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, 18 July 2004 12:50 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: 35mm Scanning Prices? Don said: > I was trying to decide whether to get that book or the one for Elements. > I have both softwares but considered the full version way over my head. > Maybe not. Well, everything in Elements is also in the full version, right; while the reverse is not true -- so a book on the whole thing should surely cover everything in Elements. ERN (who has not read the book but purely speculating)
RE: 35mm Scanning Prices?
Don said: > I was trying to decide whether to get that book or the one for Elements. > I have both softwares but considered the full version way over my head. > Maybe not. Well, everything in Elements is also in the full version, right; while the reverse is not true -- so a book on the whole thing should surely cover everything in Elements. ERN (who has not read the book but purely speculating)
RE: 35mm Scanning Prices?
I was trying to decide whether to get that book or the one for Elements. I have both softwares but considered the full version way over my head. Maybe not. Don (Old Dog) > -Original Message- > From: Mark Roberts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2004 9:04 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: 35mm Scanning Prices? > > > "Don Sanderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >The "history brush" is not a term I'm familiar with, neither is "USM". > >Could someone explain a bit. > > Pick up a copy of "Photoshop for Photographers" by Martin Evening. It is > what it says it is and it's superb. > > USM is short for "unsharp masking", which is an old black & white > darkroom technique for enhancing accutance. Photoshop can simulate it > digitally with an amazing amount of finesse and control. > > The history brush is more difficult to explain. It's a way of > transforming select bits of an image to a state they had earlier (or > later, if you're viewing an earlier stage). As I said, it's difficult to > explain! Get the book :) > > -- > Mark Roberts > Photography and writing > www.robertstech.com >
RE: 35mm Scanning Prices?
When I got my first SLR B&W was all I shot for about 5 years! TOTAL CONTROL! Pretty soon I got into toners in a big way, took a while to realise I'd shifted my interest to color. Now with the people and pets thing I like my colors! Don > -Original Message- > From: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2004 9:04 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: 35mm Scanning Prices? > > > > - Original Message - > From: "Don Sanderson" > Subject: RE: 35mm Scanning Prices? > > > > > > > I'm cursed with being a perfectionist and at the same time have > little money > > to spare. > > > > Perfectionists tend to gravitate to black and white. > Think about it. > > William Robb > >
Re: 35mm Scanning Prices?
- Original Message - From: "Don Sanderson" Subject: RE: 35mm Scanning Prices? > > I'm cursed with being a perfectionist and at the same time have little money > to spare. > Perfectionists tend to gravitate to black and white. Think about it. William Robb
Re: 35mm Scanning Prices?
"Don Sanderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >The "history brush" is not a term I'm familiar with, neither is "USM". >Could someone explain a bit. Pick up a copy of "Photoshop for Photographers" by Martin Evening. It is what it says it is and it's superb. USM is short for "unsharp masking", which is an old black & white darkroom technique for enhancing accutance. Photoshop can simulate it digitally with an amazing amount of finesse and control. The history brush is more difficult to explain. It's a way of transforming select bits of an image to a state they had earlier (or later, if you're viewing an earlier stage). As I said, it's difficult to explain! Get the book :) -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
RE: 35mm Scanning Prices?
Thanks David; The "history brush" is not a term I'm familiar with, neither is "USM". Could someone explain a bit. PS: After all the talk of "Kill Files" and such I was a bit worried I'd joined a rather "Snobbish" list! I promise not to tell anyone but this one of the most helpful and friendly lists I've had the pleasure of joining. Tour even nice to us rookies! Thanx! Don > -Original Message- > From: David Miers [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2004 8:22 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: 35mm Scanning Prices? > > > > > > > All suggestions welcome! :-/ > > > > Don > > > > > > > > Having a local processor scan them for you well, from what I've > seen, that's > a lost cause. If you don't want to scan your own I'd forget about > digitalized film. If I just have some snapshots and I feel lazy, I might > have a 1 hour lab process and print for me even yet. That often > costs less > then the ink and paper when printing yourself. Printing at home costs are > huge and when your calculating the savings of digital cameras it's really > only fair to consider the film itself and processing, which is > much cheaper > then processing and printing. The good part is, if I happen to > have a real > keeper image here, I still have the negative that I can go all out with > later for a better print. Prints from 1 hour labs suck, but as c41 > processing is fairly standardized they usually don't screw up the negative > too badly. > > Film scanning, editing, and printing has it's own learning curve which I'm > sure you can master if you can print in a color darkroom. If your working > with most flatbeds, you just added to your frustration. However I would > challenge you to a race with a ScanDual III. You have to give me the > handicap of having my film processed first though ok .. 8).. 15 minutes at > Walmart for $1.75 while we have a coffee. Ready set go, you start hooking > up your card or camera to computer, download your image, edit, and print. > I'll load my scanner, scan, edit, and print and you might be surprised > because you'd better keep moving or I might just win especially > with fairly > clean negatives just back from processing. On a larger group of > images, yes > I'll fall further behind probably, but you only said a couple..8). > > One thought for you though, film scans tend to need noise removal software > and the history brush in the full version of Photoshop is > important for dust > without losing all the detail you lose by just applying Dust & Scratch > removal. > >
RE: 35mm Scanning Prices?
Actually I am using negs (Fuji Reala) and the biggest two problems are the sharpness (focus off?) being very low and the darn thing "locking up". It gets to checking the film density and just sits there. Very frustrating. Ok Look!..A BIG ROCK.Maybe that'll work?? Don > -Original Message- > From: Brian Dunn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2004 5:05 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: 35mm Scanning Prices? > > > > The PF1800's major flaw is its inability to handle a wide > contrast range. It works ok for negative film, but has real > problems with slides. > > A quick fix is to take a tiny piece of white cellophane, such as > from a white plastic grocery bag, and layer that between the > glass and the back side of the slide. This reduces the amount of > light hitting the slide, without changing the color too much. > You can then grab detail from a white part of the image. > > A better solution is a newer / better scanner. The cheapest > current Minolta Scan Dual IV ( I think... ) is an example. It'll > do a fabulous job with slides and negatives. I just wish they > scanned faster. We use a Minolta Scan Elite II which does a nice > job, but which takes quite a while. > > A solution you may wish to try is to take a photo of the slide > with the Oly C5050. Place the image onto a light table, or else > a piece of diffusion in a sunny window, and take a picture of it > with the camera on a tripod. For negatives, try placing a blue > or cyan filter between the light and the back of the negative, to > correct for the orange mask. Keep the negative from touching the > filter or the glass, if possible. If this works acceptably well, > it'll be MUCH faster than scanning. > > > Brian > http://www.bdphotographic.com >
RE: 35mm Scanning Prices?
The PF1800's major flaw is its inability to handle a wide contrast range. It works ok for negative film, but has real problems with slides. A quick fix is to take a tiny piece of white cellophane, such as from a white plastic grocery bag, and layer that between the glass and the back side of the slide. This reduces the amount of light hitting the slide, without changing the color too much. You can then grab detail from a white part of the image. A better solution is a newer / better scanner. The cheapest current Minolta Scan Dual IV ( I think... ) is an example. It'll do a fabulous job with slides and negatives. I just wish they scanned faster. We use a Minolta Scan Elite II which does a nice job, but which takes quite a while. A solution you may wish to try is to take a photo of the slide with the Oly C5050. Place the image onto a light table, or else a piece of diffusion in a sunny window, and take a picture of it with the camera on a tripod. For negatives, try placing a blue or cyan filter between the light and the back of the negative, to correct for the orange mask. Keep the negative from touching the filter or the glass, if possible. If this works acceptably well, it'll be MUCH faster than scanning. Brian http://www.bdphotographic.com
RE: 35mm Scanning Prices?
It's reputation has gotten a little worse over the last several hours! After fiddling with a couple nice frames of 35mm I finally went back to the location with the Oly C5050 and took a couple of quick shots. A few minutes in PS Elements, Print, Done, Nice! From a Point and Shoot! (Albeit a VERY nice one.) I'm got some real concerns here, I've got some great film gear but it doesn't do much good if it can't be turned into decent prints in a reasonable amout of time/money. I REALLY don't want to set up a color darkroom again, and I hate sending film away for printing, too much control lost. The local labs are little more than 1hr photos. Or WAY expensive. The D is sounding less expensive all the time. All suggestions welcome! :-/ Don > -Original Message- > From: Butch Black [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2004 1:55 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: 35mm Scanning Prices? > > > Don Wrote: > > I'm pretty disappointed with my film scanner so I priced scanning at the > local camera shop this morning. > > What I got was: > $17.00 US for develop and scan at 1600x1200.(36 Exp.) > $31.50 US for develop and scan at 2000x3000. > > That sounds pretty high if that does not include a set of prints. We get > $4.00 for a 1024x1536 resolution CD plus about $3.50 to develop the negs. > It's about $15.00 with a set of 4x6 prints. Most mini labs offering cd's > should have something similar. > > The PF1800 has a pretty poor reputation. You may be able to find > a good deal > on a used Nikon scanner. > > Butch > >
Re: 35mm Scanning Prices?
- Original Message - From: "Don Sanderson" < Subject: 35mm Scanning Prices? > I'm pretty disapointed with my film scanner so I priced scanning at the > local camera shop this morning. > > What I got was: > $17.00 US for develop and scan at 1600x1200.(36 Exp.) > $31.50 US for develop and scan at 2000x3000. I think this is really high. We are charging two dollars a film (Canadian at that) to scan a film at 1024x1536 (any exposure count), and ten dollars to scan at 2000x3000 pixels. These are saved as jpeg files though, not tiffs. William Robb
RE: 35mm Scanning Prices?
Thanks Paul, Sounds like the prices I got were normal/good. Wouldn't take long to justify the cost of a better scanner would it? The *ist D is looking better all the time. Don > -Original Message- > From: Paul Sorenson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2004 11:48 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: 35mm Scanning Prices? > > > Around here (Milwaukee area) you typically get develop, one set of prints > and a CD for about $17 - the scans are 1200 x 1800. For hi res > JPG it runs > $5 for the CD setup plus $2/scaned neg - if you want TIFFs instead of JPGs > it's $9/scanned neg. One pro lab has a special w/develop, one > set of prints > and 10 megapixel scans for about $35. > > Paul > - Original Message - > From: "Don Sanderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED] Net" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2004 10:17 AM > Subject: 35mm Scanning Prices? > > > > I'm pretty disapointed with my film scanner so I priced scanning at the > > local camera shop this morning. > > > > What I got was: > > $17.00 US for develop and scan at 1600x1200.(36 Exp.) > > $31.50 US for develop and scan at 2000x3000. > > > > My scanner is supposedly capable of 1800x2500 but I just can't get it to > do > > a decent/reliable job. (Prime Film PF1800) > > 1.) Does this sound like fairly normal pricing to you? I was rather in > > shock! > > 2.) Does anyone else have the PF1800? How are your results? > > > > > > Don > > > > > >
Re: 35mm Scanning Prices?
Around here (Milwaukee area) you typically get develop, one set of prints and a CD for about $17 - the scans are 1200 x 1800. For hi res JPG it runs $5 for the CD setup plus $2/scaned neg - if you want TIFFs instead of JPGs it's $9/scanned neg. One pro lab has a special w/develop, one set of prints and 10 megapixel scans for about $35. Paul - Original Message - From: "Don Sanderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED] Net" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2004 10:17 AM Subject: 35mm Scanning Prices? > I'm pretty disapointed with my film scanner so I priced scanning at the > local camera shop this morning. > > What I got was: > $17.00 US for develop and scan at 1600x1200.(36 Exp.) > $31.50 US for develop and scan at 2000x3000. > > My scanner is supposedly capable of 1800x2500 but I just can't get it to do > a decent/reliable job. (Prime Film PF1800) > 1.) Does this sound like fairly normal pricing to you? I was rather in > shock! > 2.) Does anyone else have the PF1800? How are your results? > > > Don > >
RE: 35mm Scanning Prices?
I do indeed... Don > -Original Message- > From: graywolf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2004 11:02 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: 35mm Scanning Prices? > > > For $5.15/hr you expect knowledge "AND" experience? I have news > for you, for > that all you get is a warm body off the street. All that can be > expected for > that kind of pay is that they show up for work, and hopefully > they do not foul > mouth the customers. (Grinning because I know you realize this.) > > -- > > Don Sanderson wrote: > > Thanks Doug, > > > > I've called several other places within a reasonable distance of Cedar > > Rapids, Iowa. > > So far have only found the one place that does better than "Picture CD" > > quality. > > I'm pretty surprised by this, if a shop can only scan at > 1600x1200 how on > > earth are they making 16x20 and larger prints? > > I asked and they said they had no optical equipment anymore. > > Of course it sounded like an 18yr old kid each time, "hang on > I'll have to > > check on that" was the most common phrase used. > > I'll have to try again during the week when more knowledgable (I hope) > > employees are around. > > > -- > graywolf > http://graywolfphoto.com/graywolf.html > >
Re: 35mm Scanning Prices?
For $5.15/hr you expect knowledge "AND" experience? I have news for you, for that all you get is a warm body off the street. All that can be expected for that kind of pay is that they show up for work, and hopefully they do not foul mouth the customers. (Grinning because I know you realize this.) -- Don Sanderson wrote: Thanks Doug, I've called several other places within a reasonable distance of Cedar Rapids, Iowa. So far have only found the one place that does better than "Picture CD" quality. I'm pretty surprised by this, if a shop can only scan at 1600x1200 how on earth are they making 16x20 and larger prints? I asked and they said they had no optical equipment anymore. Of course it sounded like an 18yr old kid each time, "hang on I'll have to check on that" was the most common phrase used. I'll have to try again during the week when more knowledgable (I hope) employees are around. -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com/graywolf.html
RE: 35mm Scanning Prices?
Thanks Doug, I've called several other places within a reasonable distance of Cedar Rapids, Iowa. So far have only found the one place that does better than "Picture CD" quality. I'm pretty surprised by this, if a shop can only scan at 1600x1200 how on earth are they making 16x20 and larger prints? I asked and they said they had no optical equipment anymore. Of course it sounded like an 18yr old kid each time, "hang on I'll have to check on that" was the most common phrase used. I'll have to try again during the week when more knowledgable (I hope) employees are around. Don > -Original Message- > From: Doug Franklin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2004 10:29 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: 35mm Scanning Prices? > > > On Sat, 17 Jul 2004 10:17:10 -0500, Don Sanderson wrote: > > > local camera shop this morning. > > > > What I got was: > > $17.00 US for develop and scan at 1600x1200.(36 Exp.) > > $31.50 US for develop and scan at 2000x3000. > > I don't have a PF1800, and I don't know where you're located, but here > in Atlanta, at Wolf Camera you can get a CD along with the developing > for US$ 7-8 additional, over the developing, so about US$ 12-14 per 36 > exp roll. The scans used to be at 1500 x 1000, but they're a bit > larger now, though I can't remember how much. Maybe 1600 x 1200 or a > little more. > > TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ > >
Re: 35mm Scanning Prices?
On Sat, 17 Jul 2004 10:17:10 -0500, Don Sanderson wrote: > local camera shop this morning. > > What I got was: > $17.00 US for develop and scan at 1600x1200.(36 Exp.) > $31.50 US for develop and scan at 2000x3000. I don't have a PF1800, and I don't know where you're located, but here in Atlanta, at Wolf Camera you can get a CD along with the developing for US$ 7-8 additional, over the developing, so about US$ 12-14 per 36 exp roll. The scans used to be at 1500 x 1000, but they're a bit larger now, though I can't remember how much. Maybe 1600 x 1200 or a little more. TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
