----- Original Message -----
From: "Moose" <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx>
> On 11/9/2012 12:02 PM, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
>> But with digital you no longer need the sophisticated color filtration
>> control that made the Beseler expensive. Any ordinary slide duplicator,
>> macro lens and an electronic flash will do what you need with any final
>> color adjustment work handled via digital post processing.
>
> Nevertheless, "For hundreds of thousands of slides, doing each one in the
> camera is hard to think about!", I think it's
> a poor solution.
>
For hundreds of thousands of slides Nikon 5000ED is not a solution too, one
need a real professional service.
> I have done this with an Oly Slide Copier on Oly Auto Bellows. It's a nice
> set-up, with a slot into which one drops the
> slide. The slot is wide enough to be easy to use, but with springs that
> hold each slide in place against the back.
>
> And yet, after only a few slides, I could see that handling each slide
> individually was going to get old really fast.
> One can go through a stack faster than a scanner, as each exposure is
> brief, but it's a quite labor intensive job. I can
> just tell that repetitive motion is going to be a problem. Maybe if one
> could hire someone to do the feeding?
>
Shooting slide with 5D II can be very fast, there is no problem to achieve
2-3 slide a minute. I can never do this with my Nikon 4000ED and I don't
have a slide feeder. Even with a slide feeder, Tina was telling us she can
only make 20 slides an hour.
> Also, I would not use flash, having it go off right next to me over and
> over and over again would be awful. I used one
> of those inexpensive, 4x5" light 'tables'. Much easier on my eyes in any
> case, and one may mask it to just the needed
> area, so there' no glare.
Inexpensive light tables do not have high color rendering index light source
and you need longer exposure. Longer exposure may not have big issue on
noise but vibration could be a big problem under high magnification, I much
prefer flash for copy works.
>
> A scanner with auto feeder would be far preferable. The total capture time
> would be longer, but one need not be present
> while it's going on. Load a stack, go away and get on with one's life, and
> come back after it's done to load another stack.
>
> The other, possibly big deal for me is dust removal. Both VueScan and
> Silverfast claim to have found ways to use IR dust
> recognition and removal on Kodachrome. Although I briefly tried the
> Polaroid dust removal software Tina told us about,
> I've done no careful testing, nor have I yet tested the VS Kodachrome IR
> dust removal.
>
> I find it hard to believe a pure software solution would be as good and
> consistent as the IR, but I don't really know.
>
Dust is a problem but not so much with diffused light source, I found little
problem with my slides as they were processed and stored very well but the
negatives are a big problem, many of them has finger prints and scratches
due to the cheap processing labs.
C.H.Ling
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|