Please comment briefly on your film to digital conversion workflow.

Editor's picture
Many of us have slides and negatives that we’d like to convert to digital form to print using our inkjet printers or share on web pages and the Internet. What is your conversion strategy?
Please comment briefly on your film to digital conversion workflow.
I have a scanner and handle it myself.
85% (267 votes)
I have a lab or service bureau handle it for me.
3% (9 votes)
I still have “traditional” prints made from film and have yet to consider or think about how to convert them to digital form.
12% (37 votes)
Total votes: 313
Share | |
Comments
Marie's picture

My HP ScanJet does the job for me.

Duane Shaffer's picture

Since I shoot all digital now, it is a pain in the neck to do this.

Mike Cimarossa's picture

I am using both a lab and my personal scanner depending on the "importance' of the picture.

Arthur B.'s picture

I still use both methods but find digital fine for quickness, but still feel that wet prints have somthing of there own to offer.

J Chisholm's picture

Done, catalogued and digitally archived.

Myron Molnau's picture

I would like to have a lab do the conversion but I have several thousand slides and old prints so it becomes too expensive. I just do it as time allows.

Roger Gough's picture

I still would like a negative-slide scanner, if the prices ever get in line.

Bill's picture

I have both 35mm scanner (Nikon) and a flat bed for larger negs and old prints.

R.  Packard - Packard Studio's picture

I still shoot 90% of my work on film- I have yet to delete a negative by accident.

Robert Warren's picture

I use a slide duplicator picked up at Porter's Camera store that goes on my macro lens. Supurb reproduction.

John Hicks's picture

With my own scanner I can see the result in minutes. A lab would take a few days.

W.  Patterson's picture

I'm not familiar with a service bureau that can provide the largest image resolution possible for a comparable but reasonable price.

Ron's picture

With over 3000 slides to digitize, it was better economically to purchase a Nikon Coolscan V ED. Since most of the slides were my life documentary, most were scanned at relatively low resolution. About 500 were scanned at the equivalent of 8-mp and 11-15 mb. These were exceptional landscapes, underwater scenes and life, and terrestrial wildlife. Overall, the cost per slide was slightly less that if done commercially. Plus I had the chance to crop and recompose to my personal satisfaction. Afterwards, I sold the scanner on e-bay.

Rachel's picture

I work in a camera store. Until I can save for a digital body I have my film scanned at the lab at high and low resoultion.

Bob Ross's picture

Having over 10 Large Binders Full to the Brim of Slides - Hopefully my Epson Perfection 4490 Scanner with a Slide Adapter will Bail me out and give me good results. I have yet to take on this awesome job. The price of Lab work would be counter-productive and much too costly.

Ken Dvorak's picture

The workflow is simple: take a great image; have film developed at a good lab, scan film into computer, use either scanner program or Photoshop to adjust, and print. Has someone written a book about this?

Janet Walker's picture

Having your on strategy is great. It really works. Trust Me!

Burt Crapo's picture

I have a Nikon Super CoolScan 5000 ED scanner and scan my slides and color & B&W negatives to digital format. I have several thousand images in this format and still shoot film. At $30 per for a professional scan the scanner has more than paid for itself. I also convert my negatives to slide format from digital with very good results.

Bill Schmidt's picture

Have Canon 4000 film scanner. I'm about 1/2 through scanning in 30 years (10,000+!) slides and negs.

James's picture

New technology is ok. But camera film is still the "classic" film media.

Bruce Conrad's picture

KM 5400 for 35mm and Epson 3200 Photo for 4x5. Tried the Epson on 35mm, then bought the KM. I have abandoned 35mm in favor of a digital SLR, but still want slides. Opposite problem! Solution: Use a macro lens to photograph a print. I am still working on this.

Dave Aupperlee's picture

I can't believe how many Kodachromes my dad took 50-60 years ago look so good with a few minor tweaks!

Jerry Trupp's picture

I am experimenting with a slide copier and converting the image to print film, which I then can have it "digitalized" during processing.

Peter Dunner's picture

The film-digital is much more daunting and I haven't tackled that because of the thousands of negatives. I edit my slides severely and use a nikon film-slide scanner that handles batches of 50 at a time. Would love to hear how others handle the negative issue.

Timothy G.  Boudreaux's picture

I have a Nikon Super Cooscan 4000 negative and slide scanner. I love it because it has "Digital Ice" that removes any scratches on your media. I then run the digital photo through Photoshop CS2 and print the photos out on my inkjet printers.

Ron Swanson's picture

I have done 12,000 slides at home with my scanner,and have wonderful results!

Martin's picture

Your question includes the word 'like'. I don't. I just feel the need to stay current, but digital has reduced the fun level of photography for me. I think we are going from "Shutterbug" to "Computerbug".

Janetta's picture

Having your on lab or service bureau handle it for you. Make sure you know how to handle it yourself just in case something ever goes wrong.

Henry Fischer's picture

I have Walmart make an initial scan onto a photo CD + an index print so I can view the photos. I then scan the "keepers" onto my computer for further processing.

Heinz's picture

Although occasionally I may decide to make use of a service bureau, but only when my equipment is not up to the task – ie enlargements.