Converter for 35mm Slides or Neg's to Digital

[cabinetman]

Ran across this converter. Seems like a snap to use. I've got bunches of negatives that I haven't thrown out that I've lost the prints to. This seems like a great way of saving them. Anyone know about this converter?
.

[crokett]

I haven't used it but for that price you can get a full-size scanner that will do the same job and also let you scan full pages from documents. I had one a while back. The scanner would not be quite as convenient but it would be much more versatile.

[cabinetman]

I haven't used it but for that price you can get a full-size scanner that will do the same job and also let you scan full pages from documents. I had one a while back. The scanner would not be quite as convenient but it would be much more versatile.

I do have a full page scanner, and I just tried a series of 35mm slides. The scanner doesn't project the image. All I get is a dark strip with a barely visible image. Nothing you can even make out.
.

[pierhogunn]

I had a scanner that had a film/slide scanner attachment, it was a backlight with a bracket for holding the film.

It worked great, except that it held the subject about 1/16inch off the scanner glass, so everything was slightly out of focus.

I would think something dedicated to the purpose would work better

[LCHIEN]

using full size scanners requires one with high resolution (dpi) since you are only acquiring a 1.5 x 1" image. Maybe 10 times what you would use for full page images for photo quality scanning. Since 35mm film images taken with a good camera have almost infinate resolution, you'll want to be scanning to 4-10 megapixel resolution.
Also it needs to be backlit, with a quality light source that won't age or change color temperature with time (to get consistent color scans).
Finally most 35mm film scanners i worked with are slow, taking close to a minute to complete and save a hi-res scan. This is really slow if you are talking thousands of slides, like I have. On top of that you have to clean the film carefully, a spot of diust on a 35mm image looks like a piece of jump rope in the final image.
The "video" in that ad did not show how long a scan took...

[Alex Franke]

I don't think you'll be happy with this. I think you'd want at the very least 3-4,000 dpi up -- preferably even higher if you're scanning slides. This one is only 1800 dpi. I'd definitely shop around -- maybe check out some review sites to get some advice, too.

Edit: Check out http://www.consumersearch.com/scanner-reviews/review -- scroll about 1/2 way down to the "Slide scanners" headline. They point out that some flatbeds are just as good now a days. Here's a link to one of their flatbed recommendations that looks interesting -- it's about $175.

Canon CanoScan 8800F Color Film/Negative/Photo Scanner (2168B002)
New: about $175
Rating: 4.5 of 5, 192 review(s)

[cgallery]

The device Cabinetman posted is basically a 5-MP digital camera with a fixed focal length and a backlight. It essentially "snaps" a pic of the slide/negative.

They should actually be quite fast (about as fast as a low-end 5-MP camera at snapping a picture).

You can probably expect fair-quality enlargements of up to approx. 8x10.

For occasional use, one of these may be just the ticket.

BTW, there are apparently attachments for some digital cameras that do the same thing. If you have a nice digital camera it may be another option.

[dbhost]

I have an older Epson scanner with some crazy high resolution. Something like 9600dpi. What they taught us in digital imaging class in college (my degree is in digital art) is that the human eye can typically only "see" 72dpi directly, but as you enlarge an image, the higher resolution on the scanned smaller image becomes vital...

I would think any decent quality scanner that has at least 4800dpi with a negative adapter, and negative conversion software, would be able to take those negatives of yours, and convert them to high quality full size digital pictures, which you could then in turn print out or have printed on photo paper.

[Ed62]

I don't have any recommendations, but I can tell you that you can't take everything the manufacturer says about their product to be particularly accurate. One thing you need to know is that the resolution you see advertised on a scanner might (and probably will) be interpolated resolution. Optical resolution is what you should look for, and if it doesn't spell it out that way, it is likely interpolated, and that number is used to confuse the buying public. The optical resolution will always be lower than the interpolated resolution on the same device. Both resolutions should be listed, but the interpolated resolution is the one they like to talk about. Even though the interpolated resolution will be higher, it does not add any real information to the image.

Ed

[jlm]

I don't know anything about that particular device, but my experience with "off-brand" digital imaging equipment is that most of it is junk. Personally, I wouldn't buy a scanner that wasn't from one of the big imaging companies that have a lot of history in the field - Canon, Nikon, and Epson come to mind immediately. Sometimes the off-brand stuff can be quite good, but more often, either the hardware is cheap or the software is buggy, or both. More expensive film scanners have nice features, too, like automatic dust/scratch detection and filtering, which can result in much cleaner images from old film.

Also, if you're thinking of buying something like this for archival purposes, you're going to want higher than 1800 dpi resolution. If you just want something to scan in the occasional slide or 35mm negative so you can print copies yourself, this might do the trick, but for $100 I wouldn't expect super clarity in the final images.

In any case, archiving film to digital is a slow, tedious process, so my suggestion is to get a high-quality scanner, and capture the scans at the highest possible resolution/bit depth you can afford (in terms of both money and disk space), so you only have to do it once.

[jziegler]

I wouldn't trust a dedicated film scanner not made by Konica Minolta, Canon, Nikon or a similar optical company. Add Epson or maybe HP if you look at a flatbed scanner with a film adapter.

Scanning and cleaning up film is a lot of work. Consider a service where you send away all of the film and slides and they scan it for you. If you don't have a whole lot, it may be cheaper, and is much easier for you. I've heard good things about some of the services.

Jim

[Woodshark]

Scanning and cleaning up film is a lot of work. Consider a service where you send away all of the film and slides and they scan it for you. If you don't have a whole lot, it may be cheaper, and is much easier for you.
Jim

I agree. I have an Espon flat bed scanner that will scan in slides and negatives. For one or two, it is ok but it does takes forever. if you have a lot then I would edit them down to the keepers & send them out to have them done.