1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Scanning APS

Discussion in 'Digital Image Editing & Printing' started by chicagobob, May 27, 2000.

  1. chicagobob

    chicagobob Member

    Just scanned my first high resolution scan of APS film with Kodak Advantix Film DRive 300. 2400 dpi scan. 11 meg file. Incredible resolution and color fidelity.
    I do not know if they are available in former Occupying Power but they are available for under 300 dollars here. Along with my Canon IX I think I have
    a happy solution to going digital. I think this saves money and gives better quality than digital cameras under 1200 dollars and you don't have to fill up your hard drive. Neat!
     
  2. JMACNALLY

    JMACNALLY RIP

    You know we poor Brits don't get any of the latest equipment until at least a year after our American cousins, then at twice the price.

    Do you think it is an advantage to use your APS scanner rather than the Epson 1200?

    I have made a couple of custom slide and neg holders for the 1200 as the supplied holders don't cater for all formats.

    A piece of black card that fits exactly into the small lid with an aperture cut to hold 6x6 or 35mm mounted slides and a piece of glass on top to hold it flat.

    I am considering a dedicated 35mm scanner from one of our multi-nationals for £150, the specs and prices are getting better all the time though!
     
  3. chicagobob

    chicagobob Member

    I only use Epson for 120 rollfilm scans. Since I want to print 8by10in or better
    inkjet prints rather than put picture on web page I think the 1200 dpi
    limit for 35mm is too low, but that is just me.
    The APS scans at 2400 dpi give me enough room to digitaly enhance or touch up
    pictures and to get photoquality prints.
    I get my 35mm rolls scanned at 2700 dpi cheaply by mail so I don't bother with
    getting a 35mm scanner. Somebody should set up service like Dale Lab of Florida
    in UK and make money. The make 18meg files from 35mm instead of the phony 4meg
    "high resolution" files that I see advertised in AP.
    I bought APS because Canon IX plus scanner gives professional control plus
    better results than pure digital cameras that cost so much more.
    Scans have shown me that APS is sharp enough and that bad prints are probably fault of processor. I use a Canon 50mm F1.8 not a zoom and I find that I am resolving individual hairs on back of male hand from 4 feet. I don't think I need any sharper than that! Also Canon IX (the all metal SLR) has every advanced feature I need except Mirror lock up and its autfocusing options and speed are incredible.
    I didn't get new Canon 2710 which does both 35 and APS because 300 dollars was my limit and I do not have a large library of 35mm negatives that I want to
    scan. It is problably the best solution.
     
  4. JMACNALLY

    JMACNALLY RIP

    Thanks Bob, plenty to think about there. I have used Kodak CD with my EOS5 and find that very good, except the frame registration can be a little off (Black edge on left of frame).

    I have a cheap APS for fun so I will have to give it a try.
     
  5. Mario

    Mario Well-Known Member

  6. chicagobob

    chicagobob Member

Share This Page