So I decided to see what my printer's scanner could do with some 35mm negatives - as you can see above - not too much. And that is after trying to finesse them in Photoshop. This poor attempt at analog to digital conversion led me to do a bunch of research on film scanners. I'm starting to believe that I could purchase one in the $200-300 range that would suite my needs. I'm going to continue researching and asking around though before I pull the trigger.
Two I'm looking at right now are the Canon 9000F and the Epson V600. I'm more interested in saving some money by getting some quality over the amount of time it takes to scan.
I've had MPix.com and Dodd Camera develop some of my film and give me scans on CD - the quality has been poor. I believe they are scanning the prints and not the negatives. The cost and quality doesn't cut it - I believe I would save money and frustration in the long run by doing it myself.
I'll be posting the photos Dodd scanned in the next few days. They are from the first roll of film I've shot with my Minolta SRT-101 since I fixed it. I'm about to finish working on my Minolta X-570 and X-700 today.
4 comments:
Thanks for doing my research for me! Since i just found out that my old scanner doesn't work with my new Windows 7 computer, i was going to start doing the same research. Very interested to see what you come up with.
No problem. I can't wait to get one and start posting results - I just want to make the best choice.
My parents only shot slides so I'd like to scan a bunch of those too.
Nikon's are very highly regarded but also a little more expensive than you said you want to go.
Dedicated 35mm scanners are the best bet but can be limiting and expensive. It just depends on what you are going for. Flatbeds are definitely the most versatile, long as you don't need to make big enlargements.
-Mike
Post a Comment