Board index Equipment Scanners Camera instead of scanner for copying slides photos.

Scanners

Camera instead of scanner for copying slides photos.

herbier
 
Posts: 3

Camera instead of scanner for copying slides photos.

Post Sat Jan 10, 2009 12:57 pm


I have the task of converting a few hundred slides photographs to digital format.

The plan is to photograph each slide using a digital camera rather than by scanning each one.

I have done some initial test shots using a Pentax Optio 30 digital camera.
The process is quick and each slide can be done in a matter of seconds.

Problem - Early results are mixed. The process is quick however early test photos have a portion down the left hand side that is a little out of focus.
The camera is set up at the minimum macro distance of 20mm from the subject.
That has been the chosen setting as the photo needs no cropping at that distance.
Examples of camera setup & test photos are in my gallery at http://www.pbase.com/herbier/galleries

Whilst this is a forum for discussion about scanners there may be a member here who has chosen to do something similar as myself by using a camera instead of a scanner?

If there is such a success story out there then I'd love to hear of the method & equipment used to achieve the good result.

dougj
 
Posts: 2276

Re: Camera instead of scanner for copying slides photos.

Post Sat Jan 10, 2009 2:45 pm


It looks like the depth of field (DOF) is too shallow, as both the left and right side of the photos are out of focus. Can you adjust the aperture on the camera? Try changing it from the current setting of f/2.9 to f/4 - f/5.

EDIT: You may have already tried this when you did the initial setup - try adjusting the distance between the slide & camera a little to see if there is an optimum distance at which everything is in focus.
Last edited by dougj on Sat Jan 10, 2009 6:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.

dandbphoto
 
Posts: 6

Re: Camera instead of scanner for copying slides photos.

Post Sat Jan 10, 2009 3:39 pm


I agree with the DOF input - might work pretty good with tighter aperature.

My method is still only tested, not perfected, but I wondered if you had tried this: I plan to use a slide projector against white foam-core in a dark room. Then set up the camera on a tripod with a remote trigger. Distance from camera to board could vary, but will be dictated by the distance of the projector and thus size of the image.

In my trials, this seemed to work pretty well.

Dwight

isolaverde
 
Posts: 222

Re: Camera instead of scanner for copying slides photos.

Post Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:17 am


You're on the right track but - assuming the slides themselves aren't too bad - I think you should be able to much better results than those.

I copied several thousand slides from a collection that spanned some 20 years, using a fairly simple Nikon digicam, and none were that disappointing!
For example:

http://www.pbase.com/isolaverde/image/97539277

http://www.pbase.com/isolaverde/image/107258542

For background, method and more examples, see here: http://www.pbase.com/isolaverde/slidecopy


And, at the risk of repeating some of what's there, can I offer a few more thoughts and suggestions?

If you can attach the slideholding device to the camera, the scope for blur-forming movement can be almost completely elimated - which then allows you to use the longer shutter speeds that come with lower ISOs, which should improve the overall image quality significantly (and try to arrange a level of lighting that allows you to use optimal shuttertime/aperture/ISO combinations).

White balance. I've found it much better to illuminate the slide with daylight. Most of mine - and yours too, I'll bet - were shot on ordinary daylight-balanced film stock and almost all other light source is likely to lack some of the wavelengths and colours that were recorded by the original - without those the camera's going to be hard put to give a decent copy!

If using daylight or flash, select the most appropriate of the camera's WB settings rather than Auto White Balance, so the camera's WB choice isn't influenced by the colouration of the individual slides.

As far as is possible, be sure to distance the reflecting/illuminating source from the camera sufficiently that any surface detail it may have is well out of focus (beware of artex ceilings for instance!).

Try different camera/slide separations and zoom settings. Clearly the one you've chosen isn't giving very good results, and I'd guess that it's because the slide and camera are too close to one another - causing the edges of the image to be so out of focus and distorted.
Reviews say that it's possible to use Macro throughout the Optio 30's zoom range, so instead of using the extreme wide end of the zoom range, try backing off a bit and then zooming in until you fill the frame with your chosen part of the slide (but don't expect quite the same quality of results if you crop in to too small an area of the original!). You should see a difference!

Slides have a huge brightness range and, with shots like the water wheel, you may find that you get a better result if you turn the camera's contrast down to a lower setting - if there was any shadow detail to start with. Also, it may help to use the shooting histogram to check when exposure compensation is needed for very thin or dense slides. You'll soon come to recognise those that require some intervention. For example, although I've done my best to improve this one, a better starting image would probably be the answer!
http://www.pbase.com/isolaverde/image/108063993

And be sure you focus correctly. I use a little program called PhotoME, which is showing that no focusing point was active in the 'Gardens' image for instance.

Hope some of that's useful,
Peter



Board index Equipment Scanners Camera instead of scanner for copying slides photos.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests