Thread: Convert film to digital

Many of us come from days of film cameras. If you really have some priceless collection of film negatives (or slides) and wish to convert them to digital, I would recommend buying Nikon Coolscan 4000 ED. Admittedly it is costly but let me assure you - "you will cry once only".

I dont think that it is that much good idea to purchase a complete convertor until you are not going to do 100's of conversions. I would say that it would be good to give local digital photo studio to convert the film to VCD or DVD which would cost just 100 rupees per CD.

OK. This suggestion is for serious amatuers.

I have tried the local lab option (in US) and was very disappointed with the quality of conversion - the conversion was 640x480 which is simply not good enough for me. Also scratches were evident. I am not sure how good that service is in India.

I converted a few film shots using my friends 4000 ED and was simply blown away by the quality. Remember equipment is one time cost - memories are priceless. I have my son's first steps on film and video - there is no way I am going to loose that to nature's deterioration process if I can help that.

Also note that if you have this converter, you can postpone (if not eliminate) the purchase of an expesive Digital SLR.

I use another option of scanning the old photos in a laser scanner and storing the data digitally in the computer.It is the most and simple techniques that can be used but it is compromised in quality.

Its too expensive, but is it really worth it?

Yes. I am seriously thinking about it. Memories are priceless you know.

I have took all my pictures to CVS and had them added on to a disk that can be loaded onto my computer.

Originally Posted by Brandbla8

I have took all my pictures to CVS and had them added on to a disk that can be loaded onto my computer.

CVS services or for that any other service such as from Wal-Mart, etc. that make a photo CD out of your prints can be described at best as CRAP.

I know that memories are priceless but no need for spending money on them.

I think that if you don't have a good collections, then you are just wasting money.

I believe that you are having a good collection, you have advantage of that....

Scanning printed images/slides is a matter of final use.
understand that printed images (are in most cases of old photos) have already "fixed" their dpi limits - scanning them with with high resolutions will only increase the storage capacity in terms of file size but not really give you any improvement over the original print.
In any case the best results are always obtained from drum scanners .. and such facilities do exist in the more professional photography studios in india.
In fact , from the regular photo shops(Delhi) i've had scanning done at much higher resolutions than the 640x... You just have to ask for it ( and maybe also have to be a regular customer).
Buying a costly scanner for the average individual(s) use in india is not exactly practical unless you can find enough of your own images to digitize (or perhaps you might want to extend this service at a cost in your neighborhood ) - maybe you could even think of getting a good macro lens and "shoot" the prints instead of scanning.... its just a thought.

Originally Posted by Raj surin

Scanning printed images/slides is a matter of final use.
understand that printed images (are in most cases of old photos) have already "fixed" their dpi limits - scanning them with with high resolutions will only increase the storage capacity in terms of file size but not really give you any improvement over the original print.
In any case the best results are always obtained from drum scanners .. and such facilities do exist in the more professional photography studios in india.
In fact , from the regular photo shops(Delhi) i've had scanning done at much higher resolutions than the 640x... You just have to ask for it ( and maybe also have to be a regular customer).
Buying a costly scanner for the average individual(s) use in india is not exactly practical unless you can find enough of your own images to digitize (or perhaps you might want to extend this service at a cost in your neighborhood ) - maybe you could even think of getting a good macro lens and "shoot" the prints instead of scanning.... its just a thought.

I was thinking in terms of scanning the original negatives and not the prints.

Scanning old photographs will not improve quality as you have rightly put.

will i get shock touching this so old thread??

by the way, i dont have a converter. my friend owns a converter in his lab, and i use it like personally, but have to pay some ransom...