Film scanners: Do they have to be top quality for Stock

Displaying 1 to 11 of 11 matches.
DavidCallan
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Tue Jan 1, 2013 10:17AM
Hi - another film scanner question.

I'd like to digitise all my old film images for personal & IS reasons.

However, while some scanners cost £1k & above, and the popular one here (judging by the forums) is Epson V700 (which is nearly £500) my question is whether some lightweight, like the Canon CanoScan 5600F Scanner, costing under £100 would be good for IS purposes - or is that out of the question?

Thanks
David
kelvinjay
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusiveMember has won a contestForum Moderator
Posted Tue Jan 1, 2013 11:07AM
Way back in 2007 I had scans accepted from a £100 flatbed canon scanner. Downsized to XL they looked fine. But I found an interesting article which I posted in another thread, that was a bit of an eye opener.

Please visit the following link:

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=349825&messageid=6806851

Maybe you don't need a scanner at all?
DavidCallan
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Tue Jan 1, 2013 11:16AM
Hi Kelvin
While searching before posting I saw your post & read the link. I'm keen to go ahead with the scanner anyway because I don't have a macro lens & cant afford one right now; also I'm technically challenged & that seemed a bit beyond me.

Anyway, having done some searching I've come across the Epson V600 & I'm about to buy it, it is ridiculously cheaper than the V700, which many on these forums seem to endorse.

Do you think I could get an acceptance from a scan done on a scanner of this nature?

Would be really keen to hear your thoughts.

Cheers
David
kelvinjay
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusiveMember has won a contestForum Moderator
Posted Tue Jan 1, 2013 12:33PM
Technically, I see no reason it couldn't produce a file of sufficient quality to be accepted here. Downsized to medium, I'm pretty sure any scanner would be thus capable. The only real question is how big do you want them to be, presumably as large as possible and it's at that point where you may start to come across the limitations of the cheaper end of scanners.

Like so many people, I started scanning old films when I joined, but quickly realised that many of my negatives were not up to scratch, as it were. Unless shot specifically for stock standards, I think many old images are likely to suffer a poor comparison to what we would shoot today with our current gear. Shots that I thought wonderful 10 years ago, and which printed nicely enough at standard sizes, looked soft and inferior once scanned, even compared to what I eked out of my first digital camera, a little 3.2MP Canon A75.

But you said that this was not just for stock, so I'm sure that the V600 will suffice for both personal and stock possibilities, but I don't envy you the hours of cleaning up dust and specs that are frequently required. I'd say scanning old shots is more a labour of love for most people who have undertaken it.

There is a separate film queue when uploading and the film inspectors are used to seeing grain, so don't waste too much time trying to recreate digital perfection. Good luck with it.

(Edited on 2013-01-01 12:36:29 by kelvinjay)
kbwills
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto Videographer
Posted Tue Jan 1, 2013 12:43PM

I have had 35mm neg scans accepted from an Epson Perfection 3170 Photoscan (around 2009) (cost about 70 UK pounds IIRC)...


I remember being impressed with the resolution, but didnt submit many to iStock for various reasons (mostly quality of the original images).   


It did take a considerable time to scan and process the negs, even 6 (I think) at a time... so you should plan for that investment of time. 


I very seldom use the scanner now, so you are welcome to borrow it for 6 months (if you live near Essex, England )


Regards
DavidCallan
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Tue Jan 1, 2013 12:44PM
Good, I'm going to buy it.

Until May next year I'm going to be doing precious little shooting so I don't mind the labour of love needed to go through the films in the meantime. I'd like my IS port to be representative of my life, since I've emigrated twice, and I feel kind of disjointed that half my life is stuck on negatives & the other half on digital (most of which I recently lost on an external hard drive - but that's another story!) Of course, if they sell, all the better. But I'll be prepared for rejections, so won't be terribly disappointed if none make it on.

You make a good point about thinking the pics from those old negs will be great quality when they probably won't be, so that further prepares me for any disappointment.

Anyway you've been a great help as always Kelvin. Happy New Year!
DavidCallan
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Tue Jan 1, 2013 12:48PM

Posted By kbwills:

I have had 35mm neg scans accepted from an Epson Perfection 3170 Photoscan (around 2009) (cost about 70 UK pounds IIRC)...


I remember being impressed with the resolution, but didnt submit many to iStock for various reasons (mostly quality of the original images).   


It did take a considerable time to scan and process the negs, even 6 (I think) at a time... so you should plan for that investment of time. 


I very seldom use the scanner now, so you are welcome to borrow it for 6 months (if you live near Essex, England :) )


Regards


I don't live a million miles away from you actually (Kent) and it's very kind of you to offer. But my sister has gazillions of negs from our family history, going back to the 50s and will be quick to lay claim to the one I plan to get! Anyway, wouldn't want to be responsible if anything happened to your scanner - being probably the clumsiest person since Mr Bean.
NNehring
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto IllustratorExclusive iStockphoto Videographer
Posted Tue Jan 1, 2013 2:53PM

Any of the Eposn V series can be used with good quality film originals. Most of the images in this lightbox were 35mm slide or print film scanned on an Epson V200 or V500. Most were scanned at 2400 dpi and downsized to minimum size acceptable by istock. I sent out about a dozen to be scanned on a drum scanner and compared them to the Epson V200 and couldn't see enough difference to justify the cost. Here are things to consider. The original slide or film has to be well exposed and about ISO 100. ISO 400 usually won't work. I don't use ICE, it signinficantly decreases sharpness, and spend 1-3 hours cleaning dust and scratches off each scan even after cleaning the film. 30 year old and older color film has usually color shifted or faded - use color restoration on scanner and then auto color and auto tone in Photoshop to get close to the original color (most of the time). I sometimes convert to black and white when the color mostly gone or when there is bad color fringing. Old Ectachrome sometimes has the blue migrate into blue blobs which take hours to remove. If the film is "bowed" you can get diffraction patterns in the scan.


 
StanRohrer
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusive
Posted Tue Jan 1, 2013 6:25PM
I thought about scans for iStock back in 2003-2005. Most of my slides were EktaChrome ISO 400 and I figured even back then the grain was a problem. My few Kodachrome 100 slides had a good chance but were not considered of stock genre by me. So be careful to review your source film under magnifier to see if there is enough data to scan for stock.
DavidCallan
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Tue Jan 1, 2013 11:51PM

Posted By NNehring:

Any of the Eposn V series can be used with good quality film originals. Most of the images in this lightbox were 35mm slide or print film scanned on an Epson V200 or V500. Most were scanned at 2400 dpi and downsized to minimum size acceptable by istock. I sent out about a dozen to be scanned on a drum scanner and compared them to the Epson V200 and couldn't see enough difference to justify the cost. Here are things to consider. The original slide or film has to be well exposed and about ISO 100. ISO 400 usually won't work. I don't use ICE, it signinficantly decreases sharpness, and spend 1-3 hours cleaning dust and scratches off each scan even after cleaning the film. 30 year old and older color film has usually color shifted or faded - use color restoration on scanner and then auto color and auto tone in Photoshop to get close to the original color (most of the time). I sometimes convert to black and white when the color mostly gone or when there is bad color fringing. Old Ectachrome sometimes has the blue migrate into blue blobs which take hours to remove. If the film is "bowed" you can get diffraction patterns in the scan.


 


Great tips - thanks. I've ordered the V600 so am looking forward to applying the steps you've mentioned. My film was taken between 10-20 years ago. I would only consider those taken 10 years ago as stock candidates, and even then I'm not getting my hopes up.
TexPhoto
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusive
Posted Thu Jan 3, 2013 6:45AM
Way back when I faced this same question, I decided to go expensive and temporary.  I bought a used Nikon 8000 medium format film scanner on eBay for several thousand.  Spent a few months scanning my film, then re-sold the scanner on eBay.  I was not shooting more film, so why keep it.  In the end it cost me about $200. 


That said, if I had it to do over, i think I'd cull my slides down to 10-20 of the best, have them profesionally scanned, then put them on iStock and see how they did.  Evaluate how worthwhile this was.  Less time spent scanning.

(Edited on 2013-01-03 07:32:15 by TexPhoto)
This thread has been locked.
Displaying 1 to 11 of 11 matches.
Not a member?Join
Cart (0)