Much as I respect Ctein, for a lot of reasons, I think he misses the
point, for a lot of people photography is a hobby, so even though the
results might not be the best, for most people photography is a hobby.
All hobbies are a waste of time in some way or other. If someone wants
to try their hand at copying slides and film with a digital camera,
hell, maybe they'll be the first ones to do it right.
On 2/11/2016 11:22 AM, Mark Roberts wrote:
Kim Tang <[email protected]> wrote:
Thanks Malcom and Darren and all who answered.
I was browsing archive and saw Darren was experimenting with Pentax Bellows II.
Did you ever get it to work? Have yet to watch video.
I most likely do scanner, as it seems easiest.
In case you haven't seen these:
http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2012/01/scan-film-with-camera-1.html
http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2012/01/how-to-scan-film-2.html
Ctein's summary:
"OK, I thought my position on this was pretty clear from my articles
and comments over the last two columns. Apparently not. So here it is,
with no minced words:
"I think digitizing film positives and negatives by photographing them
with a digital camera is a bad idea. Most people will get worse
results than they would with a reasonably-priced flatbed scanner.
Ninety-nine-plus percent of them will get worse results than they
would with a decent film scanner or with sending their film to a
dollar-a-scan service. I have not been encouraging anyone to do this.
Quite the opposite. My hope is to discourage people from wasting their
time even trying."
--
I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve
immortality through not dying.
-- Woody Allen
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
