| 7:05 pm on Nov 6, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Look at epson .."perfection" range ..
Scanning slides depends on what size / format they are and what you want to do with the scans afterwards, and the software you have available to "correct"..the resultant scans..
You may also want to look at this ( kind of "old school" approach ;- ) alternative [scantips.com...] ..if you have a suitable camera..depends what you want to do with the end images..
BTW .I know the camera method is not 9600 dpi ..but given that others reading and wondering may not need the definition, I thought I'd throw the idea out there :)..
| 7:18 pm on Nov 6, 2011 (gmt 0)|
I've owned a few slide scanners in the past, dedicated 35MM scanners, all now too old, slow and too low-res, now relegated to scanning the dumpster.
Just looking for something to get a reasonably good scan, something I can post on the web in a digital photo album, make backups of the original raw scan to CD, then toss the tons of boxes of slides filling up a closet in the trash.
So cleaning the closet would be basically what I want to do with the end images :)
The reason I was going flatbed is because I also have a few huge boxes of prints I need to scan and I was thinking of trying to find a one-size-fits-all solution if possible.
Quality should be really good but doesn't have to be magazine quality perfect if you know what I mean.
FWIW, I have a slide duper rig using a 35MM slide holder mounted on a bellows that has been adapted to a digital camera mount. If I had all day to screw around with each image or needed something sharp as a tack and color perfect, I'm covered there!
| 9:02 pm on Nov 6, 2011 (gmt 0)|
i have the canonScan 8800F ... which i assume has now been superseded with the 9000F
and it a fantastic fast scanner, i haven't used it much for slides ... i had to buy VueScan software though to use TWAIN to import into photoshop (win 7 64 bit) as for some reason i didn't like using WIA.
... it's the best scanner i've had and i do a lot of scanning (mainly for the web)
| 5:43 am on Nov 7, 2011 (gmt 0)|
I've had an old Canon CanoScan 9900F in my office for 7-8 years now. It does the 35mm slides and negatives. You clip them into a plastic frame to hold them in place. My older scanner takes quite a while to scan film. That new Canon should be much quicker.
I'm not sure if it's available in plain flatbed scanners, but if you can get one with WiFi connectivity I'd highly recommended it. Then you can move the scanner to where your photos are.
| 6:02 pm on Nov 19, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Woo hoo! wife got me the Canon 9000f for my b'day today! :)
I'll let you know how it goes!
| 11:01 pm on Dec 4, 2011 (gmt 0)|
I bought one of the 100 dollar slide/negative scanners. I found that it would not work with the room lights on or in daylight. Too much light leaked through.
SO, to scan film/slides, I have to sit in the dark.
I have a whole bunch of VHS-C with family videos. I want to preserve them since I was actually good looking way back then. I have a converter but it is a pain. One of these day's I'm going to get motivated to bring them to a guy who does it reasonably inexpensively.
| 1:37 am on Dec 30, 2011 (gmt 0)|
I bought a no-name $100 scanner and am happy with its performance because the slides were in a garage for 30 years and are the ones I never printed on paper at the time, i.e. not primary memories. I too needed to declutter. I also found that buying a scanner doesn't actually get the job done. The time to scan, name the files, tag them is all too much. :)
For VHS tapes, our Panasonic VHS+DVD writer died and we found that there's mainly one model still available if you look hard. We are hastily transferring our tapes to DVD (-R only) before the technology can't be bought brand new.