14 ms·
Don't get a new scanner, use a DSLR + macro lens with a light board. Works great
by cerved 5y ago
Don't get a new scanner, use a DSLR + macro lens with a light board. Works great
- unfocussed_mike 5y agoYes, this does work well (and it gives you a bunch of options for rapidly extracting a lot of dynamic range out of a transparency.) But you can maybe even use the lens from your scanner, if you can liberate it and mount it. Film scanners typically have a thin strip that is often rather wider than a frame of film (because that was the way they achieved higher scan resolution at lower cost). So what you have in your scanner is a tiny, sharp, fixed aperture lens with an image circle generally large enough for full frame.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- readbeard 5y agoMany film scanners capture four channels of exposure data: RGB and infrared. Since developed film can block visible light but is more or less transparent to IR, that winds up being a pretty good map of where all the dust specks are. Which, in turn, allows automatic and very targeted software dust removal that can completely avoid parts of the exposure without dust, producing A quality of output more comparable to that of laborious retouching than inferior automatic software dust removal without a dust map. IMO that alone is sufficient to justify a film scanner over a DSLR.
- frostburg 5y agoThat doesn't work with black and white film (except chromogenic C41 ones), unfortunately.
- unfocussed_mike 5y agoOr Kodachrome (because the slides are sort of lumpy).