Places to get slides scanned?

[handicap18]

Good idea Ed. Not sure exactly when I'll get a chance to get it done, but I am on vacation starting on April 22 for a week. I'll try and get a few done by the end of that time if not sooner. I'll do a few for the same pic. Scanned and the WillEd method. Or is it YekcimCad Method. Mabe WillYek.

 

[YEKCIM]

Good idea Ed. Not sure exactly when I'll get a chance to get it done, but I am on vacation starting on April 22 for a week. I'll try and get a few done by the end of that time if not sooner. I'll do a few for the same pic. Scanned and the WillEd method. Or is it YekcimCad Method. Mabe WillYek.

Sounds like a plan.

Not sure if this helps on the name deal, but I am known by my daughter as "YEKCIM the Ancient".

~Ed

 

[WillCAD]

Ed and Will, very impressive. Excellent job. My inlaws have 6 carrosels worth of slide film from about '65 to the late 80's. Last year I bought a slide scanner and started scanning them. Have gotten though about 100-120 or so thus far. Its kind of a slow process. After my MIL passed away last Sept I haven't done as many, but now looking at the process you 2 have done I think I might just go out and buy a white foam board and take pictures of the projected image. Might be a lot faster. Though the slide projector is a little out of wack and doesn't change the slides very easily, but I'll give it a shot.

They have slides from 2 different Disney trips in '85 and '87.

Thanks for the info.

Kyle, one thing I found from my experiences over the years is that whether you are scanning with a slide scanner, scanning with a flatbed, or shooting projected slides, the most important thing is getting into a rhythm.

Many people will scan one pic, then do color correction, noise reduction, cropping, etc, bringing each photo to completion phase before moving on to the next pic. This is HIGHLY inefficient!

The best way to go is to scan them all first, then run automated noise reduction and color correction on all of them at once, and only then should you open them up one at a time to do manual fine-tuning of the crop, color, and noise of each image.

If you get into a system, you'll be surprised at how quickly large numbers of prints or slides can be scanned or shot.

I am currently in the process of re-scanning some of my older WDW pics from prints. I originally scanned them at only 150dpi and did no post-processing to them, but I am re-scanning them at 300dpi and running Noise Ninja on them for noise reduction and sharpening. I can scan and process an entire roll of 24 frames in about 20 minutes, including the time it takes to remove them from the photo album and put them back in afterwards - because I have a system that lets me get into a nice rhythm.

 

[boBQuincy]

Kyle, one thing I found from my experiences over the years is that whether you are scanning with a slide scanner, scanning with a flatbed, or shooting projected slides, the most important thing is getting into a rhythm.

Many people will scan one pic, then do color correction, noise reduction, cropping, etc, bringing each photo to completion phase before moving on to the next pic. This is HIGHLY inefficient!

The best way to go is to scan them all first... snip

Agreed! I scanned a couple to get my exposure and white balance sorted out, then went into "production", scanning them in less than ten seconds each. Once the slides were scanned I could go back and give them individual attention or batch process some.
A batch process could even be done to add a gradient mask that compensates for the "hot spot" in the middle of the projected slide.

 

[photo_chick]

My scanner does 8 at a time, so while one batch was going I would get the next batch dusted off and ready to go in. By the time I finished that the first set would be done.

I also watched the extend versions of all three Lord of the Rings movies while I was scanning. So it was not too bad.

 

[AndrewWG]

Well, YEKCIM, now you've done it. I now have a project of about 25 carousels of slides plus all of the ones that I have taken over the years that I have to photograph. Like I needed another project! Just kidding. This is kind of fun actually.

I did a couple carousels worth today. Overall, I am impressed with the results. There are times when my camera doesn't seem to have the low light ability to handle all of the shots, but it is doing OK so far. I think if I win a million dollars or so, I will ship them all out to have them professionally scanned, but for now, this method is working quite nicely. The slides are quite dusty and there is alot of noise on quite a few of them. These slides that I am doing are from the late 1950's though, so that is to be expected I suppose.

I am having a problem with focus for some reason. The camera says it is focused and the image on the white board seems to be very focused, but the photos are coming out grainy and somewhat out of focus. Not all the colors are really coming out all that good either. I changed the white balance to tungsten and daylight to try to fix them, but they still aren't what I am seeing on the wall exactly. Does anyone know what I am doing wrong there? Is this to be expected doing a job like this? I set my ISO to 200 also so the camera didn't push it to 400 like I feared it would. Should this be set to 50 or 100 instead? I just think 400 would be real grainy and noisy.

Andy

 

[YEKCIM]

Well, YEKCIM, now you've done it. I now have a project of about 25 carousels of slides plus all of the ones that I have taken over the years that I have to photograph. Like I needed another project! Just kidding. This is kind of fun actually.

I did a couple carousels worth today. Overall, I am impressed with the results. There are times when my camera doesn't seem to have the low light ability to handle all of the shots, but it is doing OK so far. I think if I win a million dollars or so, I will ship them all out to have them professionally scanned, but for now, this method is working quite nicely. The slides are quite dusty and there is alot of noise on quite a few of them. These slides that I am doing are from the late 1950's though, so that is to be expected I suppose.

I am having a problem with focus for some reason. The camera says it is focused and the image on the white board seems to be very focused, but the photos are coming out grainy and somewhat out of focus. Not all the colors are really coming out all that good either. I changed the white balance to tungsten and daylight to try to fix them, but they still aren't what I am seeing on the wall exactly. Does anyone know what I am doing wrong there? Is this to be expected doing a job like this? I set my ISO to 200 also so the camera didn't push it to 400 like I feared it would. Should this be set to 50 or 100 instead? I just think 400 would be real grainy and noisy.

Andy

Andy, if you are not using a tripod, I strongly suggest that you do so. Also, once you have your correct focus, switch to manual focus and leave it there. Personally, I'd use the lowest ISO your camera has for lowest noise. My D50's low ISO is 200 and that is what I use.

How about posting some of your shots so we can all share in the joy?

~Ed (YEKCIM)

 

[WillCAD]

Andrew - what kind of camera are you using? Are you using Auto focus or Manual focus? Are you turning off the room lights? How far away from the projected image are you setting the camera?

All of these things are important in the setup.

 

[AndrewWG]

Ok, I'll answer you both in one post here.

I am using the canon S2 IS
It is on a tripod, directly behind the projector.
The Camera is about 8 feet from the projected image
The image is about 20" wide by 18" high on the white board
I am using auto focus as I don't know how to lock it on this camera. I will look into this.
I will change my ISO to 50 I guess, since that is the lowest.
I am shooting in the dark for the most part. I covered the windows today and it was quite dark as we are having a rain storm to beat all rain storms here.

Any thoughts on what I have said so far?

Thanks again, both of you for your help.

Andy

 

[AndrewWG]

For the foam core board, check the Sunday papers for a flyer for Michael's Crafts. They many times have a 40% or even a 50% off coupon (they will also match an AC Moore coupon or a Joann's Fabrics coupon). I'm pretty sure there is a Michael's in the new Super Wally World plaza in Plymouth, there's also gotta be one in the Hyannis area or N Dartmouth Mall area. They always have great stuff like that and the prices can't be beat with the good coupons. I always pick up a frame or 2 for my enlargments at Michaels when they have the 50% off coupon.

Thanks Kyle, I will have to check that out. I got the largest piece that I could find today at Wally world. I need to get a larger one as the vertical slides don't fit on the piece that I have, the way I have it on the wall. However, I can rotate them to be horizontal and then rotate the pictures, but that is a little time consuming, so I will shop around a bit, I guess!

Andy

 

[AndrewWG]

Ok, you asked for it.

Here are some results. They are hard to explain, as (obviously) I can't show you the projected images:

This one, the boy is fully focused in the projected image and no matter what I do, he looks grainy and slightly out of focus in the final photo. Not bad, but not like the slide at all.

This one is perfectly focused in the projected image. Same problem, and the colors are quite funked in the final photo.

This one is also perfect in the slide, but bad all around in the final photo. I took it multiple times with the same results.

However, I was able to fix it a bit in photoshop. It is duller in color saturation, but the overall photo is a bit nicer.

Andy

 

[YEKCIM]

Thanks Kyle, I will have to check that out. I got the largest piece that I could find today at Wally world. I need to get a larger one as the vertical slides don't fit on the piece that I have, the way I have it on the wall. However, I can rotate them to be horizontal and then rotate the pictures, but that is a little time consuming, so I will shop around a bit, I guess!

Andy

Andy,

Your setup sounds OK to me. If your camera is on a tripod, you should be able to use your lowest ISO, and just let the meter handle exposure. I set my D50 to aperture preferred, and believe that I used f/7.1 and let the AE set the shutter speed; with a tripod, I was not unduly concerned about the length of the exposure. I also let the camera do the AF for me, and had no problems. You may want to see if your camera offers a different AF setting that works better, or just focus manually.

Also, concerning the vertical/horizontal orientation, I simply re-oriented all my vertical shots to "fit" the horizontal format that I was shooting, so I could just leave the camera oriented horizontally, if that makes sense.

~YEKCIM the Frugal

 

[AndrewWG]

Andy,

Your setup sounds OK to me. If your camera is on a tripod, you should be able to use your lowest ISO, and just let the meter handle exposure. I set my D50 to aperture preferred, and believe that I used f/7.1 and let the AE set the shutter speed; with a tripod, I was not unduly concerned about the length of the exposure. I also let the camera do the AF for me, and had no problems. You may want to see if your camera offers a different AF setting that works better, or just focus manually.

Also, concerning the vertical/horizontal orientation, I simply re-oriented all my vertical shots to "fit" the horizontal format that I was shooting, so I could just leave the camera oriented horizontally, if that makes sense.

~YEKCIM the Frugal

Now there is something I didn't think of. Using Av setting at some setting like f/8 or so and having it work the shutter speed for me. That might work better as I was just using "program mode" that is basically "auto" with a twist. The camera was haing a hard time with the aperture as it can't go very low and was giving me some red light values which is bad. It shouldn't matter though in aperture priority as you said. I will give that a try.

Most of my vertical shots "fit" into the horizontal configuration of the board so I just shot them anyways. I didn't lose much from the photos. A little from the top and bottom. The subjects are always centered when my grandmother was at the controls and I think she was the only one brave enough to turn the camera on it's side to take a photo!

Thanks again and again.

Andy

 

[YEKCIM]

Looking forward to seeing some of your "conversions"...

~YEKCIM the Sleepy

 

[handicap18]

Herer are a few I did for comparison. My setup for using my digital camera wasn't really the best. Since they are not my slides (they are my In-Law's) I wasn't going to worry to much about the correct angles and all that, plus I knew I had to crop all of them anyway. Used aperture priority as Ed had suggested. I used f/8 with ISO 200. Focal length was about 50mm. I don't know if its me or the slide projector, but I can't for the life of me get slide to drop and then go from there. So I took each one out by hand and loaded into the projector. Time consuming I know, but it worked. I was able to get about 68 slides photographed in about 45 minutes. I know for sure that had the projector worked properly I could have gotten 3 or 4 times that in the same amount of time. For the slide scanner I have a Ppulstek OpticFilm 7200. The slide holder will hold 4 slides at a time. Takes approx 30-45 seconds to scan each slide, maybe less time I actually haven't timed it. Then you push the slide holder though for the next slide, etc... I know I can't get as many scanned as I can photographed in the same amount of time. Even if you add them time it takes to download the pics off the SD card to the computer, photographing will take less time. Both ways take the same amount of time in PP. You can decide for yourselves the difference in image quality. Here are 2 different pics to compare: All PP was done in PhotoShop Elements 4.

1st. Scanned with the plustek scanner:

2nd. Photographed with my Nikon D50:

and a 2nd image:

1st scanned with the plustek:

2nd photographed with my D50:

PP that I do consists of aligning if needed, croping, then Auto Levels, Auto Contrast and Auto Color Correction. Sometimes instead I'll just do Auto Smart Fix, but it usually don't come out as good that way.

I have the scanner set to scan at 300 dpi (I'm pretty sure thats what its at, I'd check, but my USB/computer are acting up and can't get the computer to read the scanner right now. At worst its 200dpi) and after editing I get a file that is approx 1.5MB. With the Nikon D50, the after file size is anywhere from 1.95MB to just over 3MB.

I do have a bunch of their Disney slides scanned and photographed and edited, but I need to set up a folder in photoshop. I'll do that pretty soon. There are some nice shots. They went in '85 and again in '87.

 

[AndrewWG]

Well isn't that interesting, Kyle. I like the camera shot on the first one but I like the scanner shot on the second one. I guess it is a bit of a toss up, overall.

I had that problem with my projector too. I found that if a corner of the slide is even slightly damaged, it needs to be flattened as much as possible before the projector will let it drop in. Also, if the slide is bent in any way, it is a problem. I found that one in about ten wouldn't drop for me. After pulling out the slide and giving it a slight bend here or there to straighten them, it seemed to take them all.

Andy

 

[Groucho]

It probably goes without saying, but if you're doing the shoot-with-camera conversion, you'll want your absolute best lens on the camera, and if you can find an MTF chart for it, you can find what the sharpest aperture is and use that. Manual focus, aperture priority, and remote shutter release will make that part of it very quick and easy.

You'll probably get better quality with a scanner that can do digital ICE, though, I think the cheapest is the Epson 4490 for only $200. To beat that, you probably need to go with a dedicated slide/negative scanner with digital ICE, like the Nikon Coolscan series (hopefully I'll be picking one up soon). The digital ICE can remove dust and scratches more effectively than you'd be able to do in software, without losing the detail that you'd lose by running a "reduce dust" filter on the pic in Photoshop.

Kyle, it almost looks like your D50 may be set for something other than "natural" color? The shots look more contrasty than the scanned ones, too much so IMHO as I think you're losing a lot of shadow detail... like that cabin way on the right in the second photo, it's mostly just a black blob in the D50 shot. Possibly switching color settings may help with that?

 

[manning]

Are you using a white board because you don't have a projection screen or does a white board work better??

 

[YEKCIM]

Are you using a white board because you don't have a projection screen or does a white board work better??

I have a screen, but was concerned about the camera picking up the texture in the screen, so I used the white foamcore. I friend of mine tried this procedure, using his Daylite screen and the texture *did* appear in the shots, confirming my fears. Also, the foamcore is perfectly flat. A fabric screen, suspended from a metal canister by a single, center mounted adjustable "arm" might not be, and my assumption is that the edge to edge sharpness would be easier to control with the flat board.

~YEKCIM

 

[handicap18]

It probably goes without saying, but if you're doing the shoot-with-camera conversion, you'll want your absolute best lens on the camera....

Great point. Though my 18-135mm is pretty sharp its a good place to start to find which focal lenght works with my set up. In the end the 50mm f/1.8 would work perfect.

Kyle, it almost looks like your D50 may be set for something other than "natural" color? The shots look more contrasty than the scanned ones, too much so IMHO as I think you're losing a lot of shadow detail... like that cabin way on the right in the second photo, it's mostly just a black blob in the D50 shot. Possibly switching color settings may help with that?

Yeah, I've noticed that too Groucho. I did add a lot of color correction and contrast in post processing so that can be adjusted. I was playing around with the colors. I like the grass color on the 2nd, but overall the levels can come down some.

On a side note regarding that pic you mention, Groucho. That is the street we are currently living on. Just a regular old neighborhood, but about 41 years ago (based on the baby in the pic, that is my BIL who turned 41 last month). Weird to sometimes see that changes that happen over time. I'll try and take another pic when the weather breaks to get an idea what time does. All the trees directly behind the white car are now gone and the road has been paved many times over since then as well. A few other houses have been built and then had additions added.