Digital transfer of fillm

[pbcrazyboy]

I'm new here and not quite sure if this is the right area for this question but here it goes: I have film photos that I need to transfer into digital copies. There are several different sizes including of photos. These photos date back from the early 1930s up to late 1990s, and it's about time these were transfered to a digital form. I have looked at the Epson v700 and my mind is pretty made up on this. I have about 27,000 total photos, but not all need to be transfered over. Now my question is: What needs to happen between pulling the film from the protective sleeve to scanning? Is there any preparation I need to do to the film for the best possible image after scanning? And how long would it take to scan 24 35mm on the v700 with an iMac?

Thanks and God Bless!

 

[Josh66]

As far as prep, assuming they've been taken care of you don't really have to do anything. I usually just blow it off with a bulb blower once it's in the holder.


How long will it take? Figure 2-5 minutes per frame, maybe longer depending on resolution and the software/scanner you're using.

 

[molested_cow]

I am assuming that you are talking about scanning negatives/films.

Time to scan depends on the settings you use. If you check either the dust removal or ICE, then it's going to take 2-5min per frame. If you just check unsharpen(recommended), then a batch of 24 frames takes about 20min. Just make sure you have as little dust on the film and the glass bed each time you scan.

I'd be careful with removing old negatives from the sleeve/protective sheet. Sometimes they stick to it and if you pull them apart, it may damage the surface of the negatives.


If you are scanning photos prints, then it's a different story. You won't really need a v700. You can also just leave the protective sheet on provided that you can make sure the photo is laid perfectly flat on the bed.

 

[djacobox372]

You'll want as dust free of an environment as possible. I use one of these to blow the dust off the scanner and negatives (careful it is powerful enough to blow the negs out of their holder):

 

[swimswithtrout]

Yes, the scan takes 3-7 minutes. But plan on a minimum of 30-60 minutes in PP removing dust, restoring colors, etc. per photo. Someone above mentioned ICE. That is only available on Nikon scanners. Even at 1 hr per image, in the end it's worth it. I've spent the last 8 yrs as the designated "Family Curator" scanning in old family slides/negatives dating back to the early 30's. My Grandfathers Kodachrome slides from the early 40's are still as perfect as the day he picked them up from the processor.

 

[molested_cow]

You'll want as dust free of an environment as possible. I use one of these to blow the dust off the scanner and negatives (careful it is powerful enough to blow the negs out of their holder):

I always thought sucking will be better because blowing will just stir the air up and more dust will settle later. For lens "dusting", it may work better than the blow brush if it's a no-contact action.

But plan on a minimum of 30-60 minutes in PP removing dust, restoring colors, etc. per photo. Someone above mentioned ICE. That is only available on Nikon scanners. Even at 1 hr per image, in the end it's worth it.

30-60min is exaggerating.... well, that's subjective.
Plus, photoshop is my work tool, so I am proficient at it.

My Epson V700 comes with ICE, so may be Epson licensed from Nikon.

A batch of 24 frames at 2400dpi with ICE on, mine averages at 120min.
Without ICE or dust removal, 20min.

For ICE, the results is subjective, again. There are many times where it's over done, so I end up just scanning it without any dust removal or ICE and get the dusts, scratches and what not manually removed. If you have photoshop and lots of time in your hand, I recommend doing it manually. IMO the time that ICE takes to scan per photo vs the time I take to remove dusts manually, it's totally NOT worth it. So I just opt out of it.

 

[swimswithtrout]

But plan on a minimum of 30-60 minutes in PP removing dust, restoring colors, etc. per photo. Someone above mentioned ICE. That is only available on Nikon scanners. Even at 1 hr per image, in the end it's worth it.

30-60min is exaggerating.... well, that's subjective.
Plus, photoshop is my work tool, so I am proficient at it.

My Epson V700 comes with ICE, so may be Epson licensed from Nikon.

A batch of 24 frames at 2400dpi with ICE on, mine averages at 120min.
Without ICE or dust removal, 20min.

For ICE, the results is subjective, again. There are many times where it's over done, so I end up just scanning it without any dust removal or ICE and get the dusts, scratches and what not manually removed. If you have photoshop and lots of time in your hand, I recommend doing it manually. IMO the time that ICE takes to scan per photo vs the time I take to remove dusts manually, it's totally NOT worth it. So I just opt out of it.

After some research, I believe you are correct about ICE being available on more platforms now, but I still stand by my ~ 60min time frame to completely handspot a 60-70 year old slide at 4000 dpi scanned without ICE.

I've been using PS since 5.5 so I know my way around the block too.

 

[djacobox372]

its a waste of time to digitally touch up each scan, 90% of the images will never be printed. Do the touchup after you've decided to print an image.

 

[epatsellis]

for 27,000 images, I'd consider ScanCafe, they're reasonably priced and have a decent turnaround.

 

[ghache]

for 27000. id consider something faster than the Epson V***

i have the V500, its fast enought for a roll of film once in a while but for archiving thousands of picture.....i dont know, you better have alot of time on your hands.

 

[Derrel]

Like epatsellis mentioned, a scanning service might make a good deal of sense...man...I dread scanning even a box or two of slides...

Earlier this month, the British Journal of Photography's web site did a story on the increasingly common practice of using a modern, high-resolution d-slr and an illumination stage (think old, Bowens Illumitran,for example) using a light source, and opal glass as a diffusing medium, as a way to convert film-based images (slides and negatives) into the form of digitized images--quickly, and with pretty good quality.

The d-slr + backlighting method also has a pretty good range of tonal values that it can capture, making dark and underexposed slides less of a problem/issue.PITA than they are with a multi-sampling scanner, where a dark 'chrome can mean a 10-minute or longer scanning time with multi-passes.

Again, with 27,000 images to scan...I'd bet you'll be six years older by the time that Epson finishes that job...

 

[Josh66]

Yeah - 27,000, send 'em out.

A 36 exposure roll takes me probably 2-3 hours to scan...

27,000 frames is 750 rolls. 1500 hours... If you quit your job and did it full time, you could be done in about 8 months. Assuming you take breaks and have the weekend off.

 

[compur]

Some people use an old slide copier to digitize slides. It's like a long
extension tube with a diffuser. You mount it on a DSLR, insert the slide,
point it at a light source and click.

 

[Mike_E]

Or, you could knock together a light table and get a loupe and start editing what you want to digitize.

With a little practice you can tell pretty quickly what you want to scan and what you can give a miss. Chances are that of the ~27,000 photo's you have you would only want to scan 750-1000 which would greatly cut down on the amount of time you needed to spend scanning them.

Good luck

mike

 

[Ron G]

I have batch scanned slides on my flatbed scanner,once you get the scanner set up to do it you can fill the whole bed with slides and go out of town while it works.If I had that volume of work lined up that is the way I would approach it.
My Microtek 9600XL has a large scanning bed and Vuescan allows you to save the scan settings so that each time that you have slides to scan you can call up the setting template that you have saved on get to it without much hassle.
You can't use the whole bed when scanning transparencies but you can get quite a few on there.Ron G