Seems like a plus, but then there’s the ordeal/cost of setting up the digitising rig each time you want to use it to ensure that everything is in “focus” and rock-steady. Some maintain that a camera for scanning can do double duty – scan negs and make images in field. There are many choices, but of course higher resolution cameras tend to be newer and more expensive. Some might disagree, but this is what the maths says to me for me to get the sort of quality of images I want. The object is to try to make the sensor as high-res as possible to eliminate artefacts. When the monochrome has the same resolution as a colour digital camera, the monochrome will be far more accurate with a higher resolution (line pairs per mm). If you’re only scanning b&w, then use a monochrome camera. My take: the camera will need at least 45 mega-pixels for a 35mm standard frame and even more for medium format. But they don’t include the camera or lens, both of which are expensive and problematic. There are others with bundled packages: copy stand, light source, film holders. Cost $ € ¥ £įirst the equipment: mirrorless digital camera, macro lens (not extension rings), film holder, light source, copy stand/tripod… While there are many options to consider, some brands offer helpful accessories: pixl-latr. And even if it is hidden, it may be time-intensive to setup. And, unless it’s hidden away, it may not be that attractive. The setup will take up space, more space than the standard standalone scanner. It’s a bit like the home-brew PC culture of yore. There is a downside – cost in space, $ € ¥ £, time. Scanning with a digital camera sounds appealing: “I’ll save money and get better results.” But… There’s always a but. While there is much interest in scanning with a digital camera, there are other ways of scanning negatives: using a lab or home-scanning with a dedicated scanner. Thanks, Hamish… now, over to Marco:įeatured image movie still from Modern Times, Charlie Chaplin (Platinum-toned remix of United Artists, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons.) in favour of camera scanning – then please read this article. Finally, if you wish to read an article that makes the opposing argument – ie. Please also note, we are only talking about photography here, if this makes you angry, then it might be worth taking a step back. If you wish to discuss the pros and cons from your own perspective in the comments, then please feel free, but please refrain from just stating the author to be “wrong” as this adds nothing to the conversation. This article simply aims to highlight some of the perceived issues from both a technical (theory-based) perspective, and from a practical (subjective) perspective. There is no one answer to the problem of digitising film. The purpose of this article – or at least why I chose to approve it for publication – was to encourage the discussion. Preface: This article seems to have caused a few raised eyebrows, and in some cases heated responses that amount to the idea that the author of this article is “wrong”.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |