jking@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>I would like to end of with all my photos as *good* *quality* images in
>my computer or at the very least all subsequent photos.
>At the moment I use an OM3 and just take print film. When I get my print
>films developed I also ask for them to be scanned and burnt onto cd.
>However the quality of the scans it not good and I have no way to specify
>the quality. They are quite heavily Jpeg compressed and don't come close
>to the originals in terms of quality.
>So as far as I see I have four courses of action open:
>
>1. Buy a scanner and use a shops print film developing and get 7x5 prints
>and scan them. (larger prints are not ecconomical for me)
>
This is a great deal poorer quality than the others. See my sample of a
flatbed scan of a print vs. a film scan at 2700dpi of the same negative.
<http://www.geocities.com/dreammoose/TechMisc/>
>2. Buy a negative scanner get the print film developed at a shop and scan
>the negatives avoiding the cost of getting prints made
>
This and #3 will give excellent results. Scanning is, however, a
relatively tedious and time consuming project if you have many images.
You can automate it with a scanner that handles film by the roll
automatically, that gets quite expensive.
>3. develop the film myself and use a negative scanner
>4. buy a digital camera body and use my olympus and tamron lenses
>
While certainly possible, as many have started recently with the E-1 and
Can*n DSLRs, the lack of auto diaphram operation makes this impractical
for casual uses where it is a bother and for high speeed uses where it
gets in the way. It certainly is different than using an OM and the
camera bodies are bigger. Count on buying at least one AF mid-range
zoom, too. I borowed a D60 from a list member and tried it with an
adapter and some OM lenses.
<http://www.geocities.com/dreammoose/D60/index.htm> I was rather
pleased with the results, but you will notice I didn't take any pics of
moving targets.
>I am looking for a good comprimise between quality and cost per photo. I
>don't mind if the inital set up costs are quite high.
>
>Any thoughts on the way to go?
>
I don't know what options are available where you are. In my part of the
US, different shops have different services available. I am having my
negative film developed and scanned, with no prints, for a bit more than
the price as develop and print 4x6s. Unlike the PhotoCD low res scans, I
get both 800x533 high quality JPEG images and 3000x2000 TIFF images on
CD. The TIFFs are generally good enough for any standard prints and the
JPEGs for quality web use. I only scan those images where I want the
highest quality or where the bulk scan doesn't seem quite right. I'm
more than happy with the scans in almost all cases for all uses I put
them to. The other advantage I see is that I can review my images on the
screen at a large size rather than as 4x6 prints.
It might pay to look around to see what is available.
Moose
The olympus mailinglist olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: mailto:olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
To contact the list admins: mailto:olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx?subject="Olympus
List Problem"
|