Scanning slides/Photos at DVinfo.net

Justin Connor · December 5th, 2007, 12:14 AM

Newbie her eon this topic. Thanks in advance for the help.

1. Working on a documentary project and need to get any and all information at what dpi to have the pics at/scanned at for Ken Burns pans effect/styles.

2. Also, I have a slide show portion in my film cut to a song, and want to make sure the shots are the best quality possible, BUT they will be being whipped right to left - a la a slide show - and i heard that if they are at 300 dpi versus 150 - it could do something weird to the imaging?

3. I also have the negatives from some pictures...is it better and/or more expensive to scan from the negs or from the picture itself?

4. I also have actual slides that I want to turn into scanned photos for my film project -- is that an expensive conversion?

5. LASTLY, I have no idea how much this goes for -- I live in LA -- this is a very personaly project where I want each image to be the best shape possible to edit/cut with, so I'm looking for realistic, ballpark figures, and/or anywhere in Los Angeles -- if anyone lives there and has any recommendations...?

OK, that was a mouthful -- and my last words are...THANK YOU!

cheers,
Justin

Bob Woodhead · December 5th, 2007, 07:24 AM

1. KEN BURNS DIDN'T INVENT THE DAMN PAN ON A STILL-move!!!!! I bet the 1st thing they shot with TV Camera #1 was a photo on a music stand! .... sigh... /rant mode /off// Sorry, the "KBurns" attribute always ticks me off! I hope to god professors aren't using the "KB" term.... ;)

2. DPI has no real bearing in video (though it approximates 72dpi).. it's all about actual pixel dimensions (which is 720x486) in video. Make your slides bigger than 720x486 and you can "zoom in & pan" on them without pixelating. How big is determined by how much you want to "zoom in". I use my 150% rule.... anything resized more than 150% might start to look "ratty". You'll get better results doing moves via After Effects than a NLE. (generally)

3. Better? Depends on quality of the print.

4. Google it. (come on, do SOME work here) There are also slide imaging adapters for digital cameras... not great results, but not horrible. Dedicated scanners are in the $1-2k range.

5. I'm in Atlanta, but glad to do anything you need for $1300/day. ;)

TingSern Wong · December 5th, 2007, 09:09 AM

If you have access to the negatives or positives AND a good film scanner (I use a Nikon Coolscan LS5000) the quality of the scan beats scanning it from prints any day. Reason being - film scanner uses transmitted light. Prints (scanning from flatbed scanner) is scanned using reflected light. The dynamic range and colours from a film scanner is way way ahead of flatbeds.

As for resolution of the scan, it depends on how much "zoom" you would like the video image to have. For a good exposed negative / scan, it is possible to go to 4000 ppi on the scan, and then you can pan the scanned image to your heart's contended.

Nikon Coolscan LS5000 costs about $2000 - but, I am not sure if you can still buy the LS5000 today.

Justin Connor · December 5th, 2007, 07:49 PM

'ppreciate it -- gives me a good place to start...

Bob - you cracked me up....
Yes, I am laughing, and no, i am not trying to get you to do my work for me - i am just clueless on this stuff....1300/day, eh? hmmmm... ;)

December 5th, 2007, 07:49 PM	#4
Justin Connor Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Los Angeles, California Posts: 73	Thanks Guys.. 'ppreciate it -- gives me a good place to start... Bob - you cracked me up.... Yes, I am laughing, and no, i am not trying to get you to do my work for me - i am just clueless on this stuff....1300/day, eh? hmmmm... ;)

December 5th, 2007, 12:14 AM	#1
Justin Connor Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Los Angeles, California Posts: 73	Scanning slides/Photos Newbie her eon this topic. Thanks in advance for the help. 1. Working on a documentary project and need to get any and all information at what dpi to have the pics at/scanned at for Ken Burns pans effect/styles. 2. Also, I have a slide show portion in my film cut to a song, and want to make sure the shots are the best quality possible, BUT they will be being whipped right to left - a la a slide show - and i heard that if they are at 300 dpi versus 150 - it could do something weird to the imaging? 3. I also have the negatives from some pictures...is it better and/or more expensive to scan from the negs or from the picture itself? 4. I also have actual slides that I want to turn into scanned photos for my film project -- is that an expensive conversion? 5. LASTLY, I have no idea how much this goes for -- I live in LA -- this is a very personaly project where I want each image to be the best shape possible to edit/cut with, so I'm looking for realistic, ballpark figures, and/or anywhere in Los Angeles -- if anyone lives there and has any recommendations...? OK, that was a mouthful -- and my last words are...THANK YOU! cheers, Justin

December 5th, 2007, 07:24 AM	#2
Bob Woodhead Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Atlanta, GA Posts: 59	1. KEN BURNS DIDN'T INVENT THE DAMN PAN ON A STILL-move!!!!! I bet the 1st thing they shot with TV Camera #1 was a photo on a music stand! .... sigh... /rant mode /off// Sorry, the "KBurns" attribute always ticks me off! I hope to god professors aren't using the "KB" term.... ;) 2. DPI has no real bearing in video (though it approximates 72dpi).. it's all about actual pixel dimensions (which is 720x486) in video. Make your slides bigger than 720x486 and you can "zoom in & pan" on them without pixelating. How big is determined by how much you want to "zoom in". I use my 150% rule.... anything resized more than 150% might start to look "ratty". You'll get better results doing moves via After Effects than a NLE. (generally) 3. Better? Depends on quality of the print. 4. Google it. (come on, do SOME work here) There are also slide imaging adapters for digital cameras... not great results, but not horrible. Dedicated scanners are in the $1-2k range. 5. I'm in Atlanta, but glad to do anything you need for $1300/day. ;)

December 5th, 2007, 09:09 AM	#3
TingSern Wong Major Player Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Singapore, Rep of SINGAPORE Posts: 749	If you have access to the negatives or positives AND a good film scanner (I use a Nikon Coolscan LS5000) the quality of the scan beats scanning it from prints any day. Reason being - film scanner uses transmitted light. Prints (scanning from flatbed scanner) is scanned using reflected light. The dynamic range and colours from a film scanner is way way ahead of flatbeds. As for resolution of the scan, it depends on how much "zoom" you would like the video image to have. For a good exposed negative / scan, it is possible to go to 4000 ppi on the scan, and then you can pan the scanned image to your heart's contended. Nikon Coolscan LS5000 costs about $2000 - but, I am not sure if you can still buy the LS5000 today.