Found a few local film labs I thought I'd try. Maybe send a roll to each and see which one I like better.
They usually have options you can choose from:
C-41 Premium Scans –
In-scanner adjustments AND post-processing corrections (color grading, exposure, cropping and contrast edits)
Fully edited images delivered that are ready for you or your client
Custom color profiles (good if you have a brand and want consistent coloring that matches your style)
Premium Scan Pricing
C-41 Basic Scans –
In-scanner adjustments only (no additional post-processing corrections will only be made)
Full control of the editing process (good for photographers who like to edit their own photos)
Basic Scan Pricing
C-41 Auto Scans
Includes auto-scanner adjustments only (no custom color profiles or manual color correction). The negative is fed into the scanner and each frame is auto-corrected by the scanner using built-in color and density algorithms. This scan service is ideal for a photographer who is confident that the film has been metered correctly and the exposures are very consistent. This is also a great service for a beginner photographer who is just starting out and wants to evaluate different film stocks. Additional editing such as cropping, color, toning, and density may be needed to achieve a finished product. All of these differences are corrected in Premium Scans but are left as-is for Auto Scans.
So knowing I can tweak them in Lightroom if needed, which one do I want?
panos.v wrote:
Not had an M7 but I hate the little piddly shutter wheels of the other Leicas. The digital ones are so much nicer. Almost as nice as the R8/9 shutter speed wheels.
lifeandmylens wrote:
Found a few local film labs I thought I'd try. Maybe send a roll to each and see which one I like better.
They usually have options you can choose from:
C-41 Premium Scans –
In-scanner adjustments AND post-processing corrections (color grading, exposure, cropping and contrast edits)
Fully edited images delivered that are ready for you or your client
Custom color profiles (good if you have a brand and want consistent coloring that matches your style)
Premium Scan Pricing
C-41 Basic Scans –
In-scanner adjustments only (no additional post-processing corrections will only be made)
Full control of the editing process (good for photographers who like to edit their own photos)
Basic Scan Pricing
C-41 Auto Scans
Includes auto-scanner adjustments only (no custom color profiles or manual color correction). The negative is fed into the scanner and each frame is auto-corrected by the scanner using built-in color and density algorithms. This scan service is ideal for a photographer who is confident that the film has been metered correctly and the exposures are very consistent. This is also a great service for a beginner photographer who is just starting out and wants to evaluate different film stocks. Additional editing such as cropping, color, toning, and density may be needed to achieve a finished product. All of these differences are corrected in Premium Scans but are left as-is for Auto Scans.
So knowing I can tweak them in Lightroom if needed, which one do I want? ...Show more →
Get the cheapest high rez one. You can tweak them for the look YOU want in post, not the look they want...
lifeandmylens wrote:
Found a few local film labs I thought I'd try. Maybe send a roll to each and see which one I like better.
They usually have options you can choose from:
C-41 Premium Scans –
In-scanner adjustments AND post-processing corrections (color grading, exposure, cropping and contrast edits)
Fully edited images delivered that are ready for you or your client
Custom color profiles (good if you have a brand and want consistent coloring that matches your style)
Premium Scan Pricing
C-41 Basic Scans –
In-scanner adjustments only (no additional post-processing corrections will only be made)
Full control of the editing process (good for photographers who like to edit their own photos)
Basic Scan Pricing
C-41 Auto Scans
Includes auto-scanner adjustments only (no custom color profiles or manual color correction). The negative is fed into the scanner and each frame is auto-corrected by the scanner using built-in color and density algorithms. This scan service is ideal for a photographer who is confident that the film has been metered correctly and the exposures are very consistent. This is also a great service for a beginner photographer who is just starting out and wants to evaluate different film stocks. Additional editing such as cropping, color, toning, and density may be needed to achieve a finished product. All of these differences are corrected in Premium Scans but are left as-is for Auto Scans.
So knowing I can tweak them in Lightroom if needed, which one do I want? ...Show more →
My lab does some minor tweaks do deliver usable, flat JPEGs that are properly white balanced. I almost always do gamma and color grading, but I'm starting with sharp, workable JPEGs whose white balance is pretty much where it already needs to be. Although occasionally I do get scans back where someone was really on point and virtually nothing needs to be done. I mostly lean on their scans for my 120 workflow, and having someone do basic corrections really speeds things up in post, especially if you're stuck with a JPEG on the other side.
So I would be inclined to go for the "C-41 Basic Scans," where it sounds like they're delivering a clean starting point.
Also, I would encourage you to consider a 35mm scanning setup at some point. Anything to host a Nikon ES-2 holder will provide really nice results when you combine that with the Negative Lab Pro plugin for Lightroom.
theHUN wrote:
There is only so much you can do with 8-bit jpgs. 16 bit tiffs are a different story.
Certainly. But I think it's still worth sharing the success of being delivered neutral JPEG's with a modest amount of prep work by the lab. If someone can get TIFFs, or better yet scan their own, then of course that's ideal. Luckily, there's no shortage of great ways to scan 35mm.
We need a film forum so I can ask everyone how they're doing their at-home 120 scans, though. I am yet to get results with my V600 that print as well as my lab's scans.
OffTrail wrote:
Certainly. But I think it's still worth sharing the success of being delivered neutral JPEG's with a modest amount of prep work by the lab. If someone can get TIFFs, or better yet scan their own, then of course that's ideal. Luckily, there's no shortage of great ways to scan 35mm.
We need a film forum so I can ask everyone how they're doing their at-home 120 scans, though. I am yet to get results with my V600 that print as well as my lab's scans.
Flatbeds work well with 120 and larger. Keeping the negatives flat is one of the biggest problems in addition to the stability of the light source in older units. The few companies who were making holders for flatbed scanners have gone out of business with the shift to camera scanning. Flatbed scanners need someone with a new idea for a holder and a Kickstarter to get it going. Conversion software has improved since Negative Lab Pro introduced their plug in for Lightroom. Hopefully, some flatbed users will give some real world advice.
madNbad wrote:
Flatbeds work well with 120 and larger. Keeping the negatives flat is one of the biggest problems in addition to the stability of the light source in older units. The few companies who were making holders for flatbed scanners have gone out of business with the shift to camera scanning. Flatbed scanners need someone with a new idea for a holder and a Kickstarter to get it going. Conversion software has improved since Negative Lab Pro introduced their plug in for Lightroom. Hopefully, some flatbed users will give some real world advice.
I'll have to post a thread so this one stays on track, but yeah, it does seem that the commonly discussed flatbed holders are all out of production.
In any case, this is what's great about film. The negative isn't going anywhere so you can always scan again when you have a better method.
I want to echo what other's have shared and encourage anyone who is considering film to try self processing B&W. B&W processing is easy, and rewarding. I've become a big fan of XTOL type developer and TF4 fixer after listening to a FPP podcast.
44 rolls, 2 years old and still working. I only use this for expendable rolls to see what the limit batch is.
51 rolls, 1 year old
great value for $15
TF4 - 85 rolls marked but I must of missed some. Mixed 11/21/21
OffTrail wrote:
Also, I would encourage you to consider a 35mm scanning setup at some point. Anything to host a Nikon ES-2 holder will provide really nice results when you combine that with the Negative Lab Pro plugin for Lightroom.
And always, ALWAYS, get your negatives back!
Thanks for sharing! I wasn't even aware such a device was available! I may just have the lab develop and scan the first few rolls, but I definitely am intrigued by the Nikon ES-2 holder. If nothing else, I'd get RAW files instead of JPGs from the lab. It looks like all I would need is that holder and a macro lens to get started.
The labs only charge $6-$7 to develop a roll, so cost per roll definitely goes down with scanning your own it seems. It looks like it's uncut negatives, not sure if that matters or not.
lifeandmylens wrote:
The labs only charge $6-$7 to develop a roll, so cost per roll definitely goes down with scanning your own it seems. It looks like it's uncut negatives, not sure if that matters or not.
My lab's price is similar ($5 Canadian), and because I don't own a macro lens it has been cheaper for me so far to have the lab do it (I'd have to shoot a lot more film to make it worthwhile economically).
But I've had a few problems with my lab's scans (they use a Noritsu, a great scanner in general): occasionally they have horizontal lines in them and frequent dust or lint spots, even in color film scans where the scanning software can usually remove those. So it's not just about the money, but quality.
I'm more attracted to standalone scanners like the Plustek Optiscan than camera-based scanners, but the camera-based scanning setups do seem to give you more flexibility.
OffTrail wrote:
I'll have to post a thread so this one stays on track, but yeah, it does seem that the commonly discussed flatbed holders are all out of production.
In any case, this is what's great about film. The negative isn't going anywhere so you can always scan again when you have a better method.
I just developed my first roll of film (Kentmere Pan 400) at home using Caffenol in a Lab Box. Negatives look pretty good and I like the process with the Lab Box but I need a way to scan. Just for kicks, knowing the limitations, I used my ipad as a light box and photographed the negatives with my Sony and a macro lens. The pixels on the iPad show through so the images are garbage but it gave me an idea for what a good scan will give me.
I am waiting on the Valoi Easy35 as a way to get 35mm scans done quickly. Should be shipped in a week or so.
Yes, we need a film forum to discuss these things and share experiences.
lifeandmylens wrote:
Thanks for sharing! I wasn't even aware such a device was available! I may just have the lab develop and scan the first few rolls, but I definitely am intrigued by the Nikon ES-2 holder. If nothing else, I'd get RAW files instead of JPGs from the lab. It looks like all I would need is that holder and a macro lens to get started.
The labs only charge $6-$7 to develop a roll, so cost per roll definitely goes down with scanning your own it seems. It looks like it's uncut negatives, not sure if that matters or not.
I use the ES-2 all the time. There now is a knock off on Amazon which looks the same, for about 1/2 the price. it is a very simple device.
My regular 35mm scanning is using a Nikon (D750, then D850 now Z7) with Nikon 60mm AF macro lens, the ES-2 and an LED light pad. Then convert with negativelabpro.com.
The key is to use a lens that can AF in LiveView. That way it focuses on the grain in an instant and always have pin sharp results. When I first started out years ago with my D750, I tried regular AF with the SLR focus system (whatever you call that) and it was terrible. So then I manually focussed using LiveView which was fine but slow and fiddly. Then I discovered that the camera can AF in LiveView! I really should get to know my gear better... but that's what happens when you mainly shoot film.
Anyway, the awesome thing about macro lenses is they are always great as regular lenses! Also if you get a macro lens for film copying, make sure it is a 1:1 macro. Like the Nikon 60mm AF-S and D, 60mm G, the new 50 Z etc.
lifeandmylens wrote:
Thanks for sharing! I wasn't even aware such a device was available! I may just have the lab develop and scan the first few rolls, but I definitely am intrigued by the Nikon ES-2 holder. If nothing else, I'd get RAW files instead of JPGs from the lab. It looks like all I would need is that holder and a macro lens to get started.
The labs only charge $6-$7 to develop a roll, so cost per roll definitely goes down with scanning your own it seems. It looks like it's uncut negatives, not sure if that matters or not.
I'm a big fan of the ES-2! It provides excellent results with virtually no setup time. For the Z8, the little 50 MC is supposed to be compatible with the ES-2, so that and a speedlight are all you need to get going. Negative Lab Pro is also a big help for LR.
Desmolicious wrote:
I use the ES-2 all the time. There now is a knock off on Amazon which looks the same, for about 1/2 the price. it is a very simple device.
My regular 35mm scanning is using a Nikon (D750, then D850 now Z7) with Nikon 60mm AF macro lens, the ES-2 and an LED light pad. Then convert with negativelabpro.com.
The key is to use a lens that can AF in LiveView. That way it focuses on the grain in an instant and always have pin sharp results. When I first started out years ago with my D750, I tried regular AF with the SLR focus system (whatever you call that) and it was terrible. So then I manually focussed using LiveView which was fine but slow and fiddly. Then I discovered that the camera can AF in LiveView! I really should get to know my gear better... but that's what happens when you mainly shoot film.
Anyway, the awesome thing about macro lenses is they are always great as regular lenses! Also if you get a macro lens for film copying, make sure it is a 1:1 macro. Like the Nikon 60mm AF-S and D, 60mm G, the new 50 Z etc. ...Show more →
My process is the same as above, only I use the ES-2 knock off and a Nikon D610. I got that body for like $300 and it's also become my beach camera when I feel like shooting old AIS lenses.
I have a few complaints about the ES-2 knock off but it's much easier than the copy-stand method.
ottokbre wrote:
My process is the same as above, only I use the ES-2 knock off and a Nikon D610. I got that body for like $300 and it's also become my beach camera when I feel like shooting old AIS lenses.
I have a few complaints about the ES-2 knock off but it's much easier than the copy-stand method.
rji2goleez wrote:
I just developed my first roll of film (Kentmere Pan 400) at home using Caffenol in a Lab Box. Negatives look pretty good and I like the process with the Lab Box but I need a way to scan. Just for kicks, knowing the limitations, I used my ipad as a light box and photographed the negatives with my Sony and a macro lens. The pixels on the iPad show through so the images are garbage but it gave me an idea for what a good scan will give me.
I am waiting on the Valoi Easy35 as a way to get 35mm scans done quickly. Should be shipped in a week or so.
Yes, we need a film forum to discuss these things and share experiences. ...Show more →
Supposedly the iPad/iPhone screens actually do offer a very good light source for scanning, it just needs to be diffused. I saw some discussion about that on the NLP forums. You could try a few layers of a white translucent grocery bag and see if that helps any. I think I've tried that before to good effect?
But that Valoi should be just the ticket for quick 35mm scans. It looks like a nice, clean design.
