It isn't just the cost/quality balance that has to be struck, James.
How much time do you want to spend scanning the photos you have taken,
versus the time you have to take them in the first place? High resolution
scanning is, in my experience, a slow job done frame by frame. If you are
talking of numbers of photos sufficient to justify the capital outlay on a
GBP1500 scanner (my guess - say 200 films), then you must be prepared to
spend 15 weeks full-time scanning them (another wild guess at 5 mins per
scan for 200*36 scans, assuming a forty hour 'working' week).
No value judgements implied/intended/to be inferred here, merely trying to
put a different perspective on things. And of course, you wouldn't actually
scan everything for yourself.
Piers
-----Original Message-----
From: James Michael King [mailto:jking@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: 14 May 2004 11:16
To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [OM] Re: sensible course of action for getting print films into
computer
Thanks for the post I will take a lot at the web site.
>
> OR:
>
> 5. Try a different processing house - one prepared to spend a bit
> longer to produce higher-resolution scans than the usually available
> 6Mb.
>
> Since you are in UK, you can try Peak Imaging in Sheffield.
Even £7 pounds a film it would not take a lot of film to justify spending a
few hundred on a negative scanner or are there scans much better than say a
3200dpi negative scanner?
Regards
James
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"
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"
|