Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Convert Kodak Gold 200 Photos
- Thread starter Ameer_1
- Start date
-
- Tags
- kodak
- Sort by reaction score
You need a good film scanner or a good digital camera with a proper macro setup similar to the old "slide duplicators" to photograph each frame.
No, I don't recommend this. Walgreens won't send them back and Costco doesn't have a photo service anymore.
Is it just these five images, or are you just showing those as a representative sample? Are you wanting to print them or just use them for social media?
There are several apps for iPhone that you could do that won't be the best 100% quality, but would be good enough for social media. Basically you take a photo of a single negative with your phone on a light box of some sort (an iPad could work) and then the software will convert it for you. FilmLab, FilmBox, and SmartConvert would be ones that I'd consider.
If you have hundreds of negatives, then you'd want a different solution, but if it's literally just these five, then I'd try one of the apps.
As noted earlier, a scanner designed for slide/film scanning, or something like I built - a light box to backlight the slide/film and macro lens. Back in the day, there was an attachment replacing lens that was an extension tube and firing a flash into light dispersing cover. I don’t believe they make them anymore. The problem with taking a photo is that it is a photo of a negative. A scanner automatically converts it to a positive, but a camera based copy will require a software application in post. While I have a film copy capable scanner, prefer the macro light box method RAW photo as amazed at detail and dynamic range “copied” that wasn’t apparent in the original. It is amazing. That said, my son has a relatively inexpensive film/photo scanner that is quick and does a good job.
Oh, if using a flatbed scanner, up the dpi to around 2400. You normally would scan a photo at around 300 dpi, but you will get a little micro file that can’t enlarge with something as small as a 35mm film at 300 dpi.
Oh, if using a flatbed scanner, up the dpi to around 2400. You normally would scan a photo at around 300 dpi, but you will get a little micro file that can’t enlarge with something as small as a 35mm film at 300 dpi.
Your best bet is to try to find a local shop/gallery that provides the service. Dedicated film scanners give great results, but get expensive if you don't have a lot of negatives to scan:
Quick Amazon search
I found passable results with an old Epson Perfection 2400 flatbed scanner from the early 2000's. I understand that the Nikon Coolscan line was always revered for quality, but it was always out of my budget. Hardware compatibility may also be an issue when looking at something that old.
Quick Amazon search
I found passable results with an old Epson Perfection 2400 flatbed scanner from the early 2000's. I understand that the Nikon Coolscan line was always revered for quality, but it was always out of my budget. Hardware compatibility may also be an issue when looking at something that old.
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
Numbers are very important here. If it's just a handful, then turn them over to a good local camera store. In parts of Canada, I'll also give a thumbs up to the London Drugs photo labs. If you are getting into hundreds or more, then a good dedicated scanner. Or you might want to take a look at this thread.
forums.macrumors.com
I bought the Z50 mainly for this exact purpose and have been delighted with the results. Working from Gold 100 films if the focus is crisp and exposure good, clean 16x24 prints can be expected, 12x18 is a given. I went APSc because the macro lens focuses to 1:1 on a full frame. On APSc I can crop a bit in camera and there is still enough headroom for the auto focus to perform flawlessly. With full frame probably best not to work right at 1:1, rather leave a bit on the edges so the auto focus can do its thing, then do a bit of cropping post image.
With color negs there is a very real danger of retained silver which can make fine tuning the final image quite a bit more challenging. I was fortunate in that I had hand processed all of my 35mm color negs. And had properly controlled developer strength and slightly over replenished the bleach bath. Regardless expect to spend some time developing a good touch in finding the correct color balance from negs.
In my case this set-up was my first venture into the mirrorless interchangeable lens world. Dollarwise the set-up was in the same ball park as a good film capable scanner, but a good deal faster. I was perhaps a bit unique in that a new scanner would not have been compatible with my old MacPro 4,1, so adding a new computer would have bumped the scanner price a lot. Also fortunate in already having a a good tripod/head combination.
Nikon Z50 First Impressions.
I bought this camera primarily to speed up digitizing a huge whack of 35mm slides, B&W negs and colour negs. I chose to go with the 50mm ƒ-2.8 macro and the 18-140mm zoom. Preferring a single lens to cover my ordinary shooting range. I have an old Epson scanner which does really well with...
forums.macrumors.com
I bought the Z50 mainly for this exact purpose and have been delighted with the results. Working from Gold 100 films if the focus is crisp and exposure good, clean 16x24 prints can be expected, 12x18 is a given. I went APSc because the macro lens focuses to 1:1 on a full frame. On APSc I can crop a bit in camera and there is still enough headroom for the auto focus to perform flawlessly. With full frame probably best not to work right at 1:1, rather leave a bit on the edges so the auto focus can do its thing, then do a bit of cropping post image.
With color negs there is a very real danger of retained silver which can make fine tuning the final image quite a bit more challenging. I was fortunate in that I had hand processed all of my 35mm color negs. And had properly controlled developer strength and slightly over replenished the bleach bath. Regardless expect to spend some time developing a good touch in finding the correct color balance from negs.
In my case this set-up was my first venture into the mirrorless interchangeable lens world. Dollarwise the set-up was in the same ball park as a good film capable scanner, but a good deal faster. I was perhaps a bit unique in that a new scanner would not have been compatible with my old MacPro 4,1, so adding a new computer would have bumped the scanner price a lot. Also fortunate in already having a a good tripod/head combination.
Last edited:
Depending on how nutty you want to go, this set-up can handle almost any roll film I want to throw at it and is about as good as it gets within the realm of consumer scanners. I can pull more detail out of film here than any macro/camera set-up I've seen, and there are other benefits but it's slow(albeit there's some automation here too). With the flatbed added in, not shown, I literally can handle anything as large as 8x10 sheet film.
With that said, this was not all bought in one go, and has been upgraded over the years. It's also valuable to me as someone who continues to shoot film, so I often really only do have a few at a time to handle. You'd spend a lot of time here doing a big back-log of film.
I agree that for good-enough-for-social media use, or otherwise, a camera phone and app would be the way to go. If you don't mind getting a bit more hands on, you can even just photograph the negatives and do the inversion yourself in Photoshop or other editing software, although I don't necessarily recommend that route unless you're really dedicated to actually learning how to scan film. The software made for this will give you good enough results.
With that said, this was not all bought in one go, and has been upgraded over the years. It's also valuable to me as someone who continues to shoot film, so I often really only do have a few at a time to handle. You'd spend a lot of time here doing a big back-log of film.
I agree that for good-enough-for-social media use, or otherwise, a camera phone and app would be the way to go. If you don't mind getting a bit more hands on, you can even just photograph the negatives and do the inversion yourself in Photoshop or other editing software, although I don't necessarily recommend that route unless you're really dedicated to actually learning how to scan film. The software made for this will give you good enough results.
I won't say it CAN'T happen, but it would have to be a really sloppy commercial lab to have any silver remaining in a color image. Maybe the old mall parking lot labs stretching things to the limit could have it off enough for it to happen, but I don't see any halfway reputable lab letting their bleach get that bad. It's also helped by the fact that bleach is the least finicky of the steps and most bleaches thrive on oxygen exposure.
Where it can be an issue are with Blix-based at home processes(or the old Tetenal press kits). Blix basically balances on a knife edge for both operations to work properly, and it's not helped that many people using them stretch them to their limit.
Unfortunately, almost all home kits these days use Blix(Kodak-branded 3-bath C-41 is finally back on the market...). Tetenal marketed them to photojournalists to use in hotel bathrooms-more fast and convenient than long lasting.
I'm not really sure I'm following this.
Yes, with APS-C you're using the lens at less than 1:1. Still, though, I've never had an issue with autofocus working all the way up to 1:1 with any of my DSLRs even with my ancient Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8D or Micro-Nikkor 200mm f/4D(latter not recommended for copy work...).
With that said, if working at 1:1 with any subject, usually the best practice is to manually focus the lens there and then adjust camera/subject position. For film/slide copying, Nikon at least makes an adapter to fit the end of one of the micro lenses(I think the 60mm?) and hold film/slides at the correct position.
If you're saying that you can crop in scanning...well at least a decent chunk of the full frame cameras out there now are 40mp+, which for an older generation faster color negative film, that should resolve the dye clouds...