Best way to get 35mm slides onto the computer

[singlecoil]

I've looked at various solutions over the years, as I have a large quantity of slides going back to the 60s, but before I get anything I am of course asking here. I've got a Canon DSLR if it makes a difference

[Crafty_]

You can buy slide scanners, my Dad had one years ago. I'd look for one that gives you uncompressed images so you can tweak in photoshop/lightroom etc.

[singlecoil]

Crafty_ said:

You can buy slide scanners, my Dad had one years ago. I'd look for one that gives you uncompressed images so you can tweak in photoshop/lightroom etc.

I thought it would be something along those lines, am hoping for some recommendations as to makes and models.

[Mermaid]

Many ordinary scanners have a facility to scan slides - they provide a frame within which to place the slides.

[nickcowen]

If you have a normal scanner try using a white background on top of the slides like a light box, i'v done that when scanning negatives before.

[davepoth]

Colour balance is an issue on cheap slide scanners. If you look on eBay there are ex professional ones on sale - the megapixel count is a bit low (6mp or so) but that's fine for monitor display and printing up to A4 or so.

[Mermaid]

singlecoil said:

I thought it would be something along those lines, am hoping for some recommendations as to makes and models.

This seems cheap - 5mp is decent enough.


http://www.maplin.co.uk/5mp-compact-film-and-slide...

[singlecoil]

I'm happy to go into the low hundreds price-wise, even a bit more if it's worth it. Perhaps I would be best to get something with a good name, such as Canon themselves.

[B17NNS]

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Crosfield-Celsis-6200-Dr...

[Lucas CAV]

Mermaid said:

singlecoil said:

I thought it would be something along those lines, am hoping for some recommendations as to makes and models.

This seems cheap - 5mp is decent enough.


http://www.maplin.co.uk/5mp-compact-film-and-slide...

I bought one - it was flimsy and gave bad results

[Mermaid]

Lucas CAV said:

I bought one - it was flimsy and gave bad results

Thanks for the feedback

[CommanderJameson]

singlecoil said:

I'm happy to go into the low hundreds price-wise, even a bit more if it's worth it. Perhaps I would be best to get something with a good name, such as Canon themselves.

If you're prepared to spend that sort of money, get it done professionally.

[Number31]

From a thread response last year

Number31 said:

I've been going through the family archives over past few years and have tried various different techniques. The fastest way I use is to use extension tubes or a macro lens and a negative/slide holder to take copies with a digital camera. The results are OK and I have printed at small sizes with no issues. The quality is better from slides than negatives.

For better quality I use a Nikon Coolscan 5, slides have to be done individually but negatives can be batched from a strip of negatives (up to 6 at a time).

I used to use a flat bed scanner (Epson Perfection 2450) which did a good job but gave softer results with less dynamic range than the Coolscan.

Here is a comparison between the flatbed and the Nikon


Epson 2450



Nikon Coolscan 5

Here's one using the extension tube method, not bad for the age of the slide!


Canon EOS 7D 24-105mm @ 70mm + extension tube, original Vito B, Kodachrome 64

[pilbeam_mp62]

It really depends on how many slides you have to scan and what sort of quality of result you want.

For a dedicated slide scanner, take a look at the Nikon Super Coolscan 5000. You can scan slides one at a time, or you can buy the multi-feed attachment which allows you to load 30-50 slides at once (depending on the type of mount - cardboard or plastic) and then "batch" scan them and save them all. As an example, if you want a file size of say 6-7 MB, then each scan will take approximately 1 minute, so the ability to set it running and leave it is very good.

If you have strips of negatives, you can buy an attachment that allows you to scan these as well. A review of that machine can be found at http://slidescannerreview.co.uk/nikon-super-coolsc...

An alternative is a flatbed scanner. Look at the Epson V750 here :-

http://www.photoi.co.uk/Reviews/interactive/Epson%...

This one comes with several plastic holders that allow you to scan slides or negatives - both 35mm and medium format.

I own both of these machines and have achieved good results. As I said, it depends how much material you need to scan, and the results that you want. I was happy to spend more as I have a huge archive of my grandfather's material to scan - approximately 30,000 negatives and slides - he was a well known amateur photographer in the 1940-1960 period. Examples can be seen at http://www.sdjouhar.com/

A third alternative is to have them professionally scanned and have the raw scans saved to a CD for you to colour-correct individually (which you will probably need to do if the material is particularly old) - I have colour slides from the late 1930's which have turned out well with a bit of post-scan processing. Good Luck.

[singlecoil]

Thanks to everybody for taking the trouble to reply, with in some cases very detailed information. I think what I am probably going to do is to pick out some tricky ones and send them to a professional service, and see how they come out, then decide what to do about the others then. I think with the quantity I need to do I'm probably at the between point in making an investment in good gear, and getting them done by someone else.

[Simpo Two]

No doubt you have the ability to do it well if you put your mind to it, but what you may not anticipate fully is the amout of time (and sheer tedium) required to make every one look its best. I started a similar project a couple of years ago and ground to a halt long before the end.

[Craikeybaby]

CommanderJameson said:

singlecoil said:

I'm happy to go into the low hundreds price-wise, even a bit more if it's worth it. Perhaps I would be best to get something with a good name, such as Canon themselves.

If you're prepared to spend that sort of money, get it done professionally.

This would be my suggestion too.

[The Nur]

A friend recently got given a negative scanner for his birthday. I shall see him this afternoon and find out some specifics

[pilbeam_mp62]

Simpo Two said:

No doubt you have the ability to do it well if you put your mind to it, but what you may not anticipate fully is the amout of time (and sheer tedium) required to make every one look its best. I started a similar project a couple of years ago and ground to a halt long before the end.

In my experience, the trick is to initially scan everything to a very low file size (100-200k) just to see what you have. This can be done quite quickly, as the scanning time is short, for that file size. You can't really tell from just looking using a slide viewer. Then spend some time looking at the results on your PC and discard as appropriate. Only THEN do you have the remainder scanned to a decent resolution. I did the initial low-res scans on the flat-bed 20 at a time (loading up one holder while another one was being scanned) I reckon I was able to do approx 200-300 slides an hour, like that.

[paul.deitch]

I bought a Reflecta Digitdia 5000 off Ebay like this one http://www.idealo.de/preisvergleich/OffersOfProduc...

It had already scanned about 5k slides according to the previous owner. We put 25k slides through it (lent it to all my friends in the neighbourhood) and then sold it for about the same as I paid for it. It worked incredibly well and only hiccuped on really very thin card frames. Twice during ownership I had to blow dust off the LED lighting system as it was causing colour fringing on scans.

Makes a lot of noise and when you first get it you think that something is not right, but it just scans and scans and scans using 50s slide magazines. I never thought that I would be so pleased with it.

The manufacturer's software that it comes with is, in my opinion, absolute rubbish and it has to be restarted after every 100 slides. We ended up using Vuescan, which is a bit more user friendly.

Ultimate cost was bugger all apart from the time invested. There is, in my opinion, no better/cheaper way to scan a large amount of slides if you have the time.