Request for help : (Jonathan)

[MaxPower]

I used Epson Perfection 1260 Flatbed Scanner for these photos
[photoid=116983]
[photoid=113241]
without using photoshop..

[JeffinDEN]

Of course that would be a good trick (buying a d70) as it has not even been released.

and some people cannot read.

But I said I wouldn't do it anymore..

[ckw]

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

[LX-A343]

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.

Gerardo

[tbirdman429]

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.

[LX-A343]

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.

Cheers
Gerardo

[tbirdman429]

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?