The Stack Overflow podcast is back! Listen to an interview with our new CEO.

Hot answers tagged

6

If possible: move to digital My first thought is to move to digital: make digital scans or photos of your slides and use a digital projector and a laptop. One of the risks of a projector running 24x7 is overheating, with the possibility of a fire breaking out. Please be aware of that. Also take into account that you'll need to frequently change the light ...


4

Considering that you put a significant amount of work in at the darkroom printing stage then scanning the print is the best way to go. However this can be done either by yourself using a your own scanner or by sending the originals to a company that will scan them to professional standard. The second option I would only use if the images were to be ...


3

The way major museums and institutions such as the Smithsonian do it is with a large format camera using a digital scan back under very controlled lighting. Such a setup combines the strengths of flatbed scanners while scanning at very high resolutions and cameras that give greater control over the lighting used. More details about such a setup and how it ...


3

I recommend the second alternative, with some conditions. I expect your prints to be often larger than A4, and a flatbed this size takes a lot of space, costs money, ... If you have a wall available, place a vertical flat support on it, buy a piece of "museum glass" (it is basically invisible, no significant reflections, very thin, ...) and place the print ...


3

Assuming you're scanning 35mm or medium format negatives, and that you want to use the full resolution of your DSLR to digitize your negatives/slides, you can't do it with your setup (D750 + 24–85mm Nikon lens) alone. Why? You have to think in terms of magnification (also called reproduction ratio). See also: What does "magnification" mean? How ...


2

Are you speaking of continuously projecting one single slide, or projecting through a tray of 40 slides? Bad either way, but if one slide, you certainly better prepare many duplicate expendable copies. Kodachrome is said to be the best long archival life if stored in the dark, but the worst about fading with continual projection. Fujichrome is said to be ...


1

A macro lens is not necessary to get a scan but you get better results with a macro lens because you can get a better magnification level. Whether your lens (and the DSLR solution vs dedicated film scanner) is good enough for your needs, only you can answer that. Essentially you want to be close to the negative to fill the frame but you want to avoid ...


1

Not in the darkroom, but at the retouching (spotting) table. If you're working with large format film, you can paint them out on the negative. But that's risky. Most of the time you retouch the print. I never did any of it myself, but in college there were artists who would advertise their services in the photography department. I saw some of them in ...


1

For your purposes, scanning the print makes sense, as @John Hawthorne explains. However, photographers looking to create a digital archive of their film photography should always work with the negative or slide. The original has far more information on it than the print can capture, and a good high resolution scanner will preserve more of the lost detail (...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible