Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 32 of 32

Thread: Is it Worth It to Convert Film to Digital?

  1. #21
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Singapore, Central
    Posts
    181

    Default

    I am a film user too and am thinking of whether scanning my negatives into CD is a better alternative.

    I have been reading other posts regarding the noise in the digital scans and the adjustments made to the pictures. It seems that the images on the CD are pretty bad representations of the actual quality of the picture, not to mention that if I want to print them out myself at home, they would look like crap. Uploading these to my portfolio online would definately be a no-no too.

    When I was a beginner, I would be happy if 10 pictures out of a roll of 36 turned out good. But this would also mean that $6-$8 would be spend on unwanted prints per roll. Having better "picture sense" and being more consistent now, 20-30 good prints per roll of 36 shouldn't be a problem. So it would be around $2-$5 on unwanted prints, which is cheaper than the costs for scanning and sending the good ones for prints.

  2. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    The 13th floor
    Posts
    546

    Default

    Good idea to scan negative into digital format.
    Anyone has any idea what resolution is the scanning? eg into Jpeg? Resolution wise?

  3. #23
    Senior Member erictan8888's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    2,885

    Default

    not a really good idea actually.... i found that the output of the scan was really grainy... did not like it at all....

    but when i developed the photos, turned out fine....
    wasted my money to scan the film.... actually, if i had simply developed the photos and did the scan myself, i believe the output would have been much much more cleaner....

    anyway, converting to digital is really a good thing, saves a lot of money to choose all the good shots before sending them to be developed....

    moreover, you can shoot to all your delight without worrying about the costs of developing, and then go to computer and slowly pick your best shots..... only thing i see is that it might make some people ignore the bascis of good photography because they think they have so many shots to choose from and do not apply the basic discipline of taking photos....

    one thing though about film i still miss.... it is so much easier to take pictures using film than digital.... at least for me.... the pictures mostly turn out better on my film camera than my compact digital cam
    Hope to learn from everyone here....

  4. #24
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    East Side
    Posts
    122

    Default

    i just did a film to cd process at the kodak photo finish. cost me $9, $4 for developing and $5 for the scan&burn but the results were superb. here are some examples





    still looking for a cheap and quality place to develop. recommendations are welcome

  5. #25
    Senior Member erictan8888's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    2,885

    Default

    very sharp leh... where you did your scan, kodak what branch and what did you tell them?

    anyway, are the pics you posted directly from the cd or did you edit them before posting?
    thx
    Hope to learn from everyone here....

  6. #26
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    London, United Kingdom
    Posts
    596

    Default

    That's sharp, fadzuli. As with Eric I would like to know where u got your stuff processed. I don't shoot negs nowadays, but still if I do...

    BTW, for those guys shooting negs still, why not shoot slide film? I only develop those slide I feel worth keeping, and mount the particular slide, keep in drybox. Rest of it goes to like.. collect dust.

    Alvin

  7. #27
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    East Side
    Posts
    122

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by erictan8888
    very sharp leh... where you did your scan, kodak what branch and what did you tell them?

    anyway, are the pics you posted directly from the cd or did you edit them before posting?
    thx
    i did my scan at tampines. the kodak photo finish beside the mrt, under the same building as the challenger. there are other branches ard spore. might want to check this out
    http://wwwsg.kodak.com/SG/en/corp/ko...ltsNorth.shtml
    i just went up to the counter and said i want to develop and make into cd. and tada!!! wat u see is wat u get. no editing done.

    Quote Originally Posted by alvin
    That's sharp, fadzuli. As with Eric I would like to know where u got your stuff processed. I don't shoot negs nowadays, but still if I do...

    BTW, for those guys shooting negs still, why not shoot slide film? I only develop those slide I feel worth keeping, and mount the particular slide, keep in drybox. Rest of it goes to like.. collect dust.

    Alvin
    but isnt slides expensive? the film costs more and even the processing costs more. correct me if im wrong.

  8. #28
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    London, United Kingdom
    Posts
    596

    Default

    Gah that's too far. Anyway thanks for sharing!

    Hmmm slide film, depending on the emulsion: 6+ to 12+, process 5 dollars plus at rgb colour. If my memory does not fail me, it's 4 plus from Ruby photo, but takes a few days. RGB develops in 3 hours. I just got some bulk film & loader to reduce cost further; Velvia 50 about 7 per can instead of nearly 10.

    Honestly i very seldom use negs kinda forgot how much its cost! Basically shooting slide 'cause I think it rocks to view it on a lightbox vs prints/screen. That's just me :-)

    Alvin

  9. #29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fadzuli
    i did my scan at tampines. the kodak photo finish beside the mrt, under the same building as the challenger. there are other branches ard spore. might want to check this out
    http://wwwsg.kodak.com/SG/en/corp/ko...ltsNorth.shtml
    i just went up to the counter and said i want to develop and make into cd. and tada!!! wat u see is wat u get. no editing done.
    What's the resolution of the each picture?
    And is it the same as a PhotoCD?

    Thanks =)
    Last edited by radioactive28; 24th November 2004 at 06:16 PM. Reason: Oops, it's PhotoCD...

  10. #30
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    East Side
    Posts
    122

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by radioactive28
    What's the resolution of the each picture?
    And is it the same as a PictureCD?

    Thanks =)
    i think the resolution is 1544 x 1024. the size of each photo is about 1++mb
    hmm not too sure about wat a PictureCD is. but the cd comes with a software to view the images...called Noritsu CD Viewer...i think its just a software that allows u to view the photos...hope that answers ur question

  11. #31
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    86

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by leadwe
    That would be $6.50 at Grace ($3(developing)+$2.5 (scanning)+$1 (cd-rom)).

    If you have more than 1 roll, they can prob fit into one cd-rom.
    the $2.50 scanning is a quick scan or wat? not big enuf for big prints like a4 or even a3 right?

  12. #32

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AgnesKjaer
    the $2.50 scanning is a quick scan or wat? not big enuf for big prints like a4 or even a3 right?
    It comes at 1840x1232. It's good enough for 4"x6" prints at 300ppi, but I think it's more like a preview of your shots to choose the good ones from the bad.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •