Stupid question ?

[Ymegod]

I am about to get involved in digital photography but over the last fifteen or so years I have taken lots of pictures using 35mm film. Is it possible for me to use a scanner to put some of my better efforts on to my computer ?
I have mainly used print film but also have quite a lot of transparencies. Can I use a scanner on these too ?
Having got all of these masterpieces on to my computer is it then possible to fiddle about with them using Photoshop or the like ? Fiddling about would constitute adding or removing colours, unsharp mask etc.
Any advice would be appreciated including the make of a suitable scanner if this is possible.
Please be gentle with me as I am a bit of a dinosaur when it comes to computers.
Thank you in advance.

[mr jones]

yep!
yep!






and...


Yep!

scanners exist that will do all of the above, im not in a position to recommend any particular models but once scanned the images (in tiff or jpeg format) are essentially the same as those outputted by a digital camera

oh and its not a stupid question!

I agree. Can't recommend a particular make/model either, but I believe the scanners which are up to the task are extremely expensive, and this could be quite a time consuming exercise. I've seen suggestions that it might be cheaper/quicker to get the images you want scanned commercially - particularly if you're going digital and won't really need the scanner in the future? Might be worth making some enquiries.

[Ymegod]

Thank you for your reply mr jones. I preface questions like this to hopefully ensure that I don`t receive a reply that is far too complex for me to understand however well meaning the sender is.
I suspect you are right Martyn ? but on first investigation getting quite a few pictures scanned and put to disc appears an expensive process in itself. The time is not a problem as I am not talking about hundreds of photographs/slides, if only I was !
If the scanner required is prohibitively expensive I shall have to abandon the idea protem.

[MarkE19]

Here are a load of scanners and many of them can scan film & slides. Prices range from under £50 to over £500 depending on the quality & speed.
The dedicated film scanners will be the quickest & best quality, but alas also the most expensive. I know a few people that have the Jessops Filmscanner 3650 Pro at £239.99 and say it is very good for the money. The cheaper option is a flat bed scanner such as the CANOSCAN 4200F FLATBED SCANNER at £98.99 and I have an older version of this and it is ideal for the odd few scans of negs or slides. Quality is good, but not great!

HTH,
Mark.

[severnsource]

If you need the best quality you need a dedicated slide scanner. The recommended ones are currently the Minolta 5400 and Nikon coolscan, but they will cost £400-500. There are cheaper models around, but I've not seen any recommendations.

As a cheaper alternative, some of the newer flatbeds come with transparency adapters which will allow you to scan negatives and their quality is now getting quite close to film scanners. They also allow you to scan larger format negatives, if you have any. The Epson 4990 has had a good review here http://www.photo-i.co.uk/Reviews/int.../Page%2013.htm.

It is a slow and tedious process. My old Minolta film scanner takes about 2 minutes to scan each slide or negative, and doesn't have dust removal software so you have to spend quite along time spotting the scan afterwards if you want a reasonable final result. The Nikon scanners and the newer Minoltas, as well as the better flatbeds come with automatic dust removal software which eases this problem, at the expense of longer scan times.

Bill

[Ymegod]

One last question please. As the majority of my 35mm photography was in print form, as opposed to slides, am I still looking at an expensive scanner to reproduce prints ?
I think I could bear the expense of having slides put to disc although it would still work out about £16.00 per 10 slides.
Obviously working on the principle that you only get what you pay for then the more expensive scanner would be better. But if I was able to fiddle about on Photoshop would a less expensive scanner do the trick ?

[MarkE19]

This is not a hard & fast rule, but....

the more you spend on a scanner, more specifically a slide/film scanner, the higher the resolution it will work at and therefore the better the quality of the captured image. No amount of Photoshop tinkering will improve the resolution of an image! Once you find the resolution that is needed, the next issue will be the speed and quality of the optics. Speed is not an issue to the final image, but the optics will be. Obviously a well known brand name is likely to add a premium to the price of a scanner.

If scanning prints you wont be scanning at the highest resolution of even a cheap scanner. The quality of the optics and the print will be more of a factor. I've never been overly happy with the results of scanning from prints, but a ~£50 scanner will be up to the job if that is the way you intend to go.

Mark.

[severnsource]

What Mark says about scanners is quite true; also a good scanner will have a better dynamic range than a cheap one. That is it will be able to recover detail from the dark parts of an image as well as the light parts, the cheap ones tend to not be very good at that.

I have found that, as long as you are scanning from a good print, you can get acceptable results that way, and you can use any good cheap flatbed. Obviously the results won't be as good as from a scan of the negative made with a good scanner, but thay can be good enough.

And as Mark said, you can't get generate information that is missing from the scan, whatever editing program you use.

Depending on how many images you want or need to scan, and how much you value your time, you may find that the best compromise is to have your slides and negs that you want good scans of done commercially and get a good flatbed to scan your prints.

Bill

[Geordie Jester]

really impressed with the Canon 8400F. great deal with Ebuyer.com too.

fantastic results.

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1712301,00.asp for a review

[Ymegod]

Thank you for all of your advice. Time to show my incomprehension of computers again. Why have several people mentioned scanning negatives ? To what end please.
Finally does anybody know of a good place to send slides/prints to get them scanned and put to disc.
Thank you again.

[Geordie Jester]

Scanning negatives just simply allows you to scan in shots to the PC that you have taken on 35mm and had developed (maybe in the past). It then allows you to manipulate contrast and brightness etc and treat as a digital shot.

You can get shots put on CD most places when you get a film developed, but it maybe easier if you have your own to use as and when.

Or even cheaper is to get a 35mm film developed but with no prints ! Then you can scan them at home and only print the ones worth doing.

You can scan in prints, but I think most people would agree it is best to scan from the original negative

[jaymac]

I use the Epson RX500 all in one which will do 35mm negs or pos. I am well pleased with iis results on the above. It should be reasonably priced now or replaced by newer models
Jay

[DJW]

YMEGOD, your inbox is full so can't send you a message.

Have a look here though :- http://www.fredmiranda.com/24-70/

& also here http://www.photo.net/equipment/canon/28-70

& lastly here http://www.wlcastleman.com/equip/reviews/24_70/