Newbie at digitizing - let's KISS

[NancyP]

Keep it simple, stars. (I don't want to use the usual second S, rather rude)
I am a LF newbie. If I want to post an image to a thread (probably the "post your mistakes" thread ;) ) here, I will have to digitize it. I know zip about scanning. Can one use low-end office flatbed scanners for low-resolution scans for web use?

[Larry Gebhardt]

You can use most office scanners to scan prints, up to the size the scanner supports.

If you want to scan the film you will need a scanner with a transparency adapter that supports the film size you wish to scan. There are many used flatbed scanners that support 4x5 and a few that support larger. And a few new ones that are still on the market that support 4x5 and larger.

What do you want to scan?

[NancyP]

4 x 5
Eventually I will want to do a good job at scanning, but right now I think that what I need is an adequate job of scanning, sufficient to send an image or two for troubleshooting (name this artifact!) or critique.

[Leigh]

Buy a scanner. There's a used Epson V750 available at the moment. Great scanner.

Use the manufacturer's scanning software, or a third-party program if you prefer.
Whatever you choose, stick with it until you understand it thoroughly. Experiment.

Place the print face down on the scanner glass, up against whichever corner the scanner identifies.

Scan per the software protocol.

Save the scanned file to your hard drive.

Various programs are available to resize and edit the images.

KISs. ;-)

- Leigh

[StoneNYC]

4 x 5
Eventually I will want to do a good job at scanning, but right now I think that what I need is an adequate job of scanning, sufficient to send an image or two for troubleshooting (name this artifact!) or critique.

Just get the Epson V750 and be done with it. Truly, it's a "little" pricy in terms of getting it new, but well worth it, it does anything from 35mm, 120, and 4x5 and comes with those inserts, it also can do wet scanning if you ever want to get into it. And is the best compromise.

I did a lot of searching and ultimately, instead of spending money on a lesser unit that will be hard to sell later for any value, just get the Epson V750... It will do up to 8x10 actually but that size you need your own insert or to use the glass directly instead of a holder.

Essentially it has 2 lenses, one GOOD lens and one average lens. The good lens focused at the holder hight for up to 5x7 (but you'll need to get a special holder for 5x7) but can do 8x10 on the lesser lens by placing it directly on the glass. This doesn't matter much as 8x10 is so large you generally won't need the extra sharpness of the better lens.

The Epson software it comes with is a heck of a lot easier to use than SilverFast or ViewScan, and if you ever want to get fancier, those other software packages support this scanner.

Hope this helps.

AND I just noticed it's on sale!!!

Almost $150 less than I payed....

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/426128-REG/Epson_B11B178061_Perfection_V750_M_Pro_Scanner.html

[Larry Gebhardt]

Assuming you intend to scan film you would be well served with either a used or new Epson. I have an older 4870 which would meet your needs and are available for not much money. There are other discontinued models as well like the 2450, 3200, 4990. The current V700 and V750 will also work. Anything from the 4870 and newer is pretty good, and will easily meet your stated purpose and more.

There are also Microtek and a few other scanners out there, but I know little about them.

[Leszek Vogt]

If you wish to avoid the software and/or scanners (for now) you can set up a digital camera w/macro lens, attaching it via a clamp or small tripod....so long you have enough area underneath to be able to move the negative in order to stitch it + space for the light. Hopefully all aligns at proper angles. You also need a light (preferably diffused) and that can be LED panel or a small flash + some milky plexiglass. Anyway, once you set this up, the camera can take 4 or 6 overlapping shots of the 4x5 nega, which you can combine and reverse even in a cheapo Elements program. More sophisticated programs will do better job, but it's about "good enough" results for the Web. Over time you can decide whether you wish to stay with a flatbed rig, go straight to drum scanning....or just have a pro lab do selective quality scan/s in order to hang the print.

Les

[Lenny Eiger]

If what you a re interested in is going to the web, stick the film on a lightbox, square up to it and take your photo with a point and shoot.. That's as simple as it gets.. I think one shot is probably all you need... Get a copy of PhotoShopp and learn enough to invert an image (command I), add a curve adjustment layer to tweak it and save it out to a jpeg. While PhotoShop might be harder than some of the other options, it gives you a slow way to start learning it nice and slow...

Lenny

[vinny]

I have an epson 3200 listed in the classifieds here. It does 4x5 and comes with the appropriate holders.

[ROL]

...simple, stars.
I resemble that remark.:p



Can one use low-end office flatbed scanners for low-resolution scans for web use?
Some of my original scans still on my site were with an early century HP Officejet. You don't need, and should not post, images greater than 72 DPI (and of reasonable dimension no greater than 800 pixels on a side – e.g., less than 200 KB) in public forums on the net both for your own security and the sanity of users attempting to scroll through your masterpieces. Even with nicer scanners, and they're all plenty good for your stated use these days, you'll still want to downsize "original" scans to the web-able format suggested above.







…bow, throws kiss, bows again, exits stage left.















… wait, did you call me stupid (KISS)? I take back everything I've said.

[StoneNYC]

I resemble that remark.:p



Some of my original scans still on my site were with an early century HP Officejet. You don't need, and should not post, images greater than 72 DPI (and of reasonable dimension no greater than 800 pixels on a side – e.g., less than 200 KB) in public forums on the net both for your own security and the sanity of users attempting to scroll through your masterpieces. Even with nicer scanners, and they're all plenty good for your stated use these days, you'll still want to downsize "original" scans to the web-able format suggested above.







…bow, throws kiss, bows again, exits stage left.















… wait, did you call me stupid (KISS)? I take back everything I've said.

It's a little harder now, you look like an amateur to anyone with the new higher pixel count screens as everything looks pixelated compared to the surrounding detail of the we page and browser buttons/cursor etc.

Many of you guys post images and I'm like "yuck" just because it's so pixelated.

I would raise up the pixel count slightly just keep the image size itself smaller.

And trust me, you're not loosing anything to anyone, no one would have bought it if they are saving small image files, it's not worth the stress or time, and the more people steal your work, the better you must be LOL. Just water mark everything... :)

[ROL]

It's a little harder now, you look like an amateur to anyone with the new higher pixel count screens as everything looks pixelated compared to the surrounding detail of the we page and browser buttons/cursor etc.

Many of you guys post images and I'm like "yuck" just because it's so pixelated.

I would raise up the pixel count slightly just keep the image size itself smaller.

And trust me, you're not loosing anything to anyone, no one would have bought it if they are saving small image files, it's not worth the stress or time, and the more people steal your work, the better you must be LOL. Just water mark everything... :)

I am an amateur. 72 DPI still looks fine on my high res iPad. Save that high res stuff for your website, where you can give viewers a choice. Why would I "trust" you? Water marking is for poseurs. (trust me ;))

[VictoriaPerelet]

Nancy, you can tape corners of neg to sheet of white paper, tape paper on window glass. Use your cell phone of digital camera (disable flash) to frame neg, take pic, reverse it in photoshop.

If you do not have photoshop, post it here, somebody will reverse and post it for you.

......

Another way is to buy 1/2 tonn linotype drum scanner on ebay, have it truck delivered to your home, figure out electrical wiring and calibration, wet mounting, ppc mac os9 software and scan it. You'll get a lot of advise on how to do that :o

[koh303]

Keep it simple, stars. (I don't want to use the usual second S, rather rude)
I am a LF newbie. If I want to post an image to a thread (probably the "post your mistakes" thread ;) ) here, I will have to digitize it. I know zip about scanning. Can one use low-end office flatbed scanners for low-resolution scans for web use?
Microtrek have 2 models that scan 4X5. its kind of a "secret" but they usually cost about 20$ + shipping on the used market (Ebay), and offer decent results, most definitely for that price. The models are scanmaker 5700 (and 6800) and 5900. You can actually get 100mb+ files from those, but not the best Dmax or color control.

[koh303]

It's a little harder now, you look like an amateur to anyone with the new higher pixel count screens as everything looks pixelated compared to the surrounding detail of the we page and browser buttons/cursor etc.

Many of you guys post images and I'm like "yuck" just because it's so pixelated.

I would raise up the pixel count slightly just keep the image size itself smaller.

And trust me, you're not loosing anything to anyone, no one would have bought it if they are saving small image files, it's not worth the stress or time, and the more people steal your work, the better you must be LOL. Just water mark everything... :)

Computer screens display at 72dpi.
How does raising the pixel size make the image size smaller?

[Jim Andrada]

I think 72 PPI was the old Mac default, Windows was 96 PPI.

[StoneNYC]

Computer screens display at 72dpi.
How does raising the pixel size make the image size smaller?

My Mac "Retina" screen displays in 226-326 depending on the model (iPad/iPhone/Mac computer screen) so the ppi is MUCH higher, so either the image is tiny, or it is pixelated if exported at 72ppi depending on the actual monitor display size (as in if it displays 600x800ish or 1200x1800ish will change how it appears to the end user).

So for me it's often pixelated looking on my retina screen.

[koh303]

...