Thank you all.
I’m scanning the family shots. These do not require absolute cleanliness nor
sharpness. Their preservation aims at content more than form. Weren’t they
meant for 9x13cm prints in the first place … and I get more with the scans on
the Epson flatbed scanner than was visible on the prints.
It will get trickier when I reach the photographic department - slides and negs
I shot for, excuse me, art's sake ... And there I wouldn’t like to compromise
too much and possibily give them a new (digital) life.
This is obviously a long-distance race, and I have discovered Plustek has a
machine that takes the Leitz standard slides trays. The only hitch is that it
apparently doesn’t take neg film strips … and the price tag is, well, ermmm, a
tag ...
I’ll keep you posted in my reflection and/or decision.
Thanks again
Amities
Philippe
> Le 29 oct. 2018 à 18:23, Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx> a écrit :
>
> On 10/27/2018 5:34 AM, Philippe wrote:
>> I’ve started scanning negs and slides using my obsolete flatbed scanner,
>> fighting dust (any cleaning tip welcome) in the process.
>>
>> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/Phileica/London+2011/2006-Oxford-scan--5.jpg.html
>>
>> Leica R8 - Elmarit 24mm - neg film
>>
>> Amities
>>
>> Philippe, looking for a faster way to process thousands of frames … And here
>> again, any recommendation welcome, well, below the 500€ tag I’d be ready to
>> spend on a new scanner...
>
> You don't say what sort of frames. It makes a difference. Some stuff about
> scanning:
>
> Silver B&W:
>
> This can't have dust and surface defects removed using an IR second scan.
> Aggressive dust removal saves endless time spotting. CH and Jan have given
> their strategies, although both were used on slides.
>
> My limited experience finds that eliminating static charge on the film, then
> blowing dust off, is effective. I don't know what's out there these days. I
> use this thingie from years ago, designed to eliminate static charges on
> vinyl records.
> <http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/tech/Misc/StaticEliminate.jpg>
>
> Polaroid Dust Removal, a long ago orphaned bit of software, available free on
> the web, does a wonderful job of cleaning up dust, and also seriously whacks
> image detail. Used in a layer in PS, the mask painted in/out, it can save
> lots of spotting time. In this example, I used it only for the sky.
> <http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/Others/BSwale/Home2_dipton-srp15-1200px.htm>
>
> Kodachrome:
>
> KR also has silver in the finished transparency, and was not IR cleanable.
> However, both VueScan and Silverfast have worked out ways to do it.
>
> Color Neg, Chromogenic B&W and non KR slides:
>
> I have found IR cleaning to be magic for color negs and non KR slides with my
> Canon FS4000 film scanner and 5000F flatbed and Vuescan; a HUGE time and
> sanity saver.
>
> Jan found IR cleaning with his Nikon scanner to compromise fine detail of
> slides. I haven't noticed that with the Canon. I did find that multiple
> passes could wring a tiny bit more detail out of recent films. A lot of older
> and faster films just don't have the detail, anyway.
>
> Scanners:
>
> AG and CH found veiling flare in their Nikon scans. After a lot of trouble
> and "repairs", CH abandoned them. The Nikons have shallow DoF, which has
> caused some people trouble, and a semi coherent light source, which tends to
> accentuate scratches, etc. Tina has scanned many, many thousands of slides
> with a Nikon and auto slide loader.
>
> CH just posted another pic of his camera "scan" set-up and Jan recently
> described his. I would use a small light table, rather than the flash CH
> uses, but otherwise the same set-up.
>
> If you are mostly looking at sticks of negs and batches of slides I think the
> only good quality consumer scanners still being made and serviced may be
> flatbed Epsons? They make under an $200 model with IR and 3.4 Dmax, but that
> only does 4 slides or two sticks of film at a time, as well as their much
> more expensive top line models.
>
> Work flow:
>
> I load the scanner, then physically scan all frames to "RAW" files in
> Vuescan. I don't need to be present while that goes on. I then "scan" those
> files to conventional TIFFs, which is very quick. If you ever end up at that
> point, I can give a couple of hints about how to make it easier/better.
>
> Hopefully Helpful Moose
>
> --
> What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|
