A lot of inexpensive scanners have a transparency/negative attachment
that does a decent job. It usually installs in place of the cover and
passes the light through the transparency. I have the Epson Perfection
1200U Photo. I think it sells for around $400 with the negative and
transparency attachment, and it provides true optical resolution of
1200dpi with 36 bit color depth. I've made some 13x19 prints from 35mm
transparency scan that are quite acceptable.
Paul
Ann Sanfedele wrote:
>
> I'm getting green with envy over you guys that have slide scanners
> I only have a umax 1220p which is just fine for my prints but i have
> zillions of slides stashed away and about 10,000 BW negs, too - The darkroom
> is increasingly taxing on my back and id love to be able to work more with
> the scanner for some stuff. Anyway...
> What's a good one, how much do they cost? I've been told they are VERY
> expensive.
> Is there anyway I can gerryrig the flat bed to scan a slide? Alternatively, any
> of you
> guys that have one live in NYC that might let me do a bit on yours in exchange
> for
> work that I can do for you or stuff I'm selling on ebay?
>
> Obviously, private email responses puleeze
>
> annsan
>
> Bucky wrote:
>
> > I feel I may have got myself into a battle over the meaning of "trivial".
> >
> > Although I have never HAD to do so, since VueScan compensates
> > automatically, I've had good results like this:
> >
> > Scan the neg as if it were a slide; output in 16-bit color depth to
> > Photoshop (although if you can't, 8-bit might be OK too; I've never really
> > tried it). Include some of the unexposed film around the frame in the scan.
> > In photoshop, set this unexposed color to be white, using the Curves control
> > and the white eyedropper. Then invert (Ctrl + I) the image, making a
> > positive out of a negative. Tweak
> > the color and exposure as usual. You can also invert first, then set the
> > border to be black.
> >
> > If there are other approaches that may be more technically correct, I am
> > interested.
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Daniel Tokarczuk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2001 5:39 PM
> > Subject: RE: Questions about film scanners (off-topic)
> >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Bucky
> > > >
> > > > Most programs compensate for the mask automatically, but it is
> > nontheless
> > > > trivial to do in Photoshop, should you wish to.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I have found it rather non-trivial. I use a light box and a digital camera
> > > to catalog my negatives, and have to go through quite a set of
> > machinations
> > > to remove the negative mask.
> > >
> > > Do you have an easy way to do it?
> > >
> > > -
> > > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
> > > visit http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions.
> > >
> >
> > -
> > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
> > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Visit the PUG at
> > http://pug.komkon.org.
>
> -
> This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
> go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Visit the PUG at
> http://pug.komkon.org.
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Visit the PUG at
http://pug.komkon.org.
