Analog film photography and cameras

So how much moolah does Jessops/Snappy Snaps actually work out as for a process and scan? And any idea what equipment they use/what sort of resolution 35mm scans come back in?

Think I'll give Peak Imaging a whirl. Those prices look damn reasonable!

They use drum scan which give you the best result, however it varies from shop, my regular shop scan them at 2000x2000 @300dpi TIFF for a medium format roll.

normally I tend to get it done at 1500x1000 @ 75dpi, unless there are some snap I want to get scanned at a higher quality, I use the Nikon Coolscan.

Peak Imaging mate, say no more!

great suggestion, I was getting tired of Brixton snappy snaps charging me for breathing in their vicinity with 120 film in hand...

Ed - do you own your own Coolscan or do you go somewhere to use one?

On a similar but separate note - any idea how much one could scan in 20mins? If you're a member at PhotoFusion you can use their Imacon 949 for £15 for 20mins (£10 if you're a student). I have no idea about the workflow or prep required to get the most out of your 20mins. Someone please enlighten me! :)

Wools, the Jessops/SS solution costs around a tenner for dev and CD (bit less I think) and the standard resolution isn't amazing, but plenty good for Flickr.

I know, sounds poor, but fits my workflow (I only shoot XP2), means I don't have to send film in the post, and if I need higher res I scan myself.

OK, I'm throwing it out there. Anyone out there process and scan their own film? If so, would you be willing to show a noob the ropes? That's me by the way.

OK, I'm throwing it out there. Anyone out there process and scan their own film? If so, would you be willing to show a noob the ropes? That's me by the way.

Yes* and Yes!

• I only develop black and white at home.
  

Only just read this. Spenceey, I'm PMing yo' bootay next time I finish a roll of black and white. Was that a yes to just the processing or do you scan as well? Cheers man.

2000x2000 @300dpi TIFF for a

that doesn`t even mean anything. if the result is 2000x2000 from 120 they
scanned it at around 900dpi. the 300dpi is meaningless in this context you
can attach any value to a file.

that doesn`t even mean anything. if the result is 2000x2000 from 120 they
scanned it at around 900dpi. the 300dpi is meaningless in this context you
can attach any value to a file.

HELL YEAH !!!!!

I have spent years trying to explain to people that a computer file has no resolution or size only an absolute pixel count. You can of course call it 300ppi (not 'dpi) if you wish - which then imposes a 'size' on it if (and only if) it is printed at that resolution.

Like you say, In Ed's example ("2000x2000 @300dpi") you can jettison the '300dpi' part as it is meaningless - by way of an illustration you could, if you want, call that same file "2000x2000 @ 5ppi" or "2000x2000 @ 60,000ppi" - it makes no difference to the file size, resolution or pixel count, it's still the identical 2000 x 2000 pixel file and it still has no 'size'.

[/shameless pedantry]

I gathered that. I was just interested in how many pixels you could squeeze out of a 35mm shot for a reasonable price.

Let says on the Nikon Coolscan, it's possible to get an equative of an 21 megapixels full frame camera with more control than a RAW files.

that is if the film is correctly exposed, low ISO etc.

As for the 300dpi, that's my cock-up, it's 72ppi.

hey up, bit cheeky I know but thought i'd post up that i'm selling my gr10, incase anyone here was interested: http://www.lfgss.com/thread45925.html

cheers

x

There is actually a DIGITAL camera/photography thread.

Yes. Cheeky it is.

but it is a film camera?

Oh, Ashe....

Oh, Ashe....

That wasn't me! I swear! My account was temporarily hijacked my someone called, minx, sphinx, jinx.....or something like that.
Its okay now. I've changed the password. ;)

hahaha I saw the digital camera thread, that's wh I posted it in here... ;)

I think for that mistake you should now buy it!

I'm pretty happy with this. On our way to Avebury for the summer solstice.

v nice. Personally I like shots with plenty of flare, but apparently not to everyone's taste...

If they were wearing rapha it might make it on the cafe wall. ;)

Ha! Funny you should say that. I was actually going for that 'Rapha paincave' look. I too am a big fan of lens flare.

the trick to paincave shots is that they make pain look like pleasure - but you know this. It does have that serene quality to it. What did you take it with? Have you had it printed?

Superbly done wools. It's a beauty.

I took it with a Yashica T5 (cheers MrSmyth) using HP5. It's my jersey pocket camera now. :)

I emailed this guy and he says he uses a T4 so, when the T5 was mentioned, I jumped at the chance. It's an ace little camera.

looks good...