If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
The first four images were rejected because of 'bad quality'. The last one was rejected because of undersharpening. How can I improve the quality of these images? Since I scanned them from 4x6 inch prints using a 4 year old flatbed scanner, would they show up better if I used a film scanner? If so, which one would you recommend?
Forget about them. Even if a slide/film scanner will always get better results, than a flatbed scanner, I doubt, it will do a job good enough. Just a feeling though....
As for slide/film scanners: I know the Minolta Scan Dual, which is already a good scanner. Nikon Coolscan should be a class better, from what I heard, but also a class more expensive. Perhaps others here have other sugestions here.
These pictures were shot with a Nikon N65 with a Nikkor 70-300 zoom lens. The film that I used was just cheap Walgreens store brand 200 speed film. Do you think I would get clearer images if I used slide film like Kodak Elite Chrome 100? I would shoot with a digital SLR, but I just don't have the money to get one right now.
Well, a slide scan will sure get you better results, than a print scan or a scan from a negative. Which slide film yiu choose is also a question of personal taste. In those old times, when I shot slides, once I had tried Fuji Provia, I never changed again. Others will tell you that Kodachrome ist the best. Try some of them.
Lesson 1 - never skimp on film ... having spent the money on good equipment, it doesn't make sense to save a few cents on the film. Even a good filmscanner will not be able to work magic on crap film.
Pretty much any brand name film will produce better results - slide film is best, but if you want to shoot negative film, then stick with Kodak or Fuji - my personal preference is Fuji Reala for normal lighting conditions, but for higher speed film, Superia 200 and 400 do a pretty good job.
A film scanner can improve quality significantly, but that is a substantial investment. I'd think very hard as to whether this is the best option for you or would the money be better put aside for a DSLR? It is anticipated that Nikon will be producing a "budget" DSLR soon (the D70?).
Cheers,
Colin
________________________________________
A member of AirTeamImages
We process personal data about users of our site, through the use of cookies and other technologies, to deliver our services, personalize advertising, and to analyze site activity. We may share certain information about our users with our advertising and analytics partners. For additional details, refer to our Privacy Policy.
By clicking "I AGREE" below, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our personal data processing and cookie practices as described therein. You also acknowledge that this forum may be hosted outside your country and you consent to the collection, storage, and processing of your data in the country where this forum is hosted.
Comment