I only have between 300 and 400 of the batch I'm interested in for now.
There is no way I will entrust my grandparents negatives to shippers and
a lab.
On 2018-06-27 17:44, Tomas Kuchta wrote:
I would encourage you to scan a few negatives/transparencies, measure
the
time it takes and extra
In the sixties, the only way I could afford taking pictures was doing my
own processing. Much better than the commercial shops.
Ken
On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 9:45 PM Russell Senior
wrote:
> Some film processing is better than others. I have some excellent prints
> (and negatives) from early 195
Some film processing is better than others. I have some excellent prints
(and negatives) from early 1950s Germany, taken with a Leica by my dad and
processed by a local camera shop there. He reported that the processing in
the US was so bad when he got back to the States, that he sold the camera.
I would encourage you to scan a few negatives/transparencies, measure the
time it takes and extrapolate to cover all your negatives/positives.
When I did that years ago, I quickly realized that scanners are just too
slow for what I wanted to do in a time given to me by mother nature - by
couple of
There is a guy in Seattle named Andrew Filer, who I met in a
then-hackerspace called Metrix:Create who modified a Kodak Carousel
projector in such a way as to backlight the slides (reduced wattage of the
bulb, replaced the heat shield with frosted glass), basically used the
projector as a slide adv
Russell,
I would be interested in the method. Picture of a screen?
-Denis
On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 11:03 AM, Russell Senior
wrote:
> Gotcha. I don't have any better solutions for that.
>
> If they were slides, I'd suggest the method I used in Seattle a few years
> ago, that went through about
On Wed, 27 Jun 2018, Russell Senior wrote:
What kind of transparencies? If they are 35mm slides, and lots of them,
there is a better way.
Yep. I have a Wolverine F2D 35mm film to digital scanner. Stand-alone
unit. I'm about ready to put it on Craig's list as I no longer need it.
Rich
_
Gotcha. I don't have any better solutions for that.
If they were slides, I'd suggest the method I used in Seattle a few years
ago, that went through about 3000+ slides in kodak projector carousels is
an afternoon. Automation++.
On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 10:32 AM, Michael Rasmussen
wrote:
> Of p
Of primary interest are 2 1/4 x 2 3/4 (6x9cm) negatives from my
grandparents. After that 35mm negatives.
I was entrusted to my grandparents' negatives and am feeling a
responsibility to scan them into digital files for my relatives.
On 2018-06-27 10:10, Russell Senior wrote:
What kind of tran
Good, I like you, never got good results from Sane. Good to know that there
are other solutions. Simple scan has worked well for me.
On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 11:00 AM, Michael Rasmussen
wrote:
> In another group, it was suggested I try Vuescan from
> https://www.hamrick.com/
> The free Linux down
What kind of transparencies? If they are 35mm slides, and lots of them,
there is a better way.
On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 9:00 AM, Michael Rasmussen
wrote:
> In another group, it was suggested I try Vuescan from
> https://www.hamrick.com/
> The free Linux download untars to three binaries.
>
> It
In another group, it was suggested I try Vuescan from
https://www.hamrick.com/
The free Linux download untars to three binaries.
It just works.
Now to, when I have time, figure out the issue with xsane.
On 2018-06-26 18:37, Michael Rasmussen wrote:
I've acquired an Epson V500 flatbed scanner
12 matches
Mail list logo
