Paul Richard Jones

Digitalizing Kodachrome 25 & 64 slides

17 posts in this topic

I have a question for photographers who have slides and would like to 'digitalize' to present to SS.  Have you  successfully digitalize any or all of your slides and if so, what equipment did you use and did SS accept any of this hybrid digital images?

 

I have more than 20,000 Kodachrome 25 & 64 Slides processed by Kodak and taken all over the U.S., Germany, Austria, Korea, Mexico, and Alaska...mostly with Nikon F3 and N8008 with Nikon lens.  I have a PACIFIC IMAGES ELECTRONICS power slide 5000 digitalizing machine that offers many variable to digitalize slides.  I have done so setting the unit to optimize everything to attach images to accompany travel articles my wife and I write. 

We are both retired Army.

Sincerely,

Paul Jones

Edited by Paul Richard Jones
spell error

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Leonard, That thought has occurred to me...but, my dilemma/challenge/frustration is to set the Pacific Image machine to what Dots Per Inch and at what resolution ie. JPEG or TIFF.  When I digitalized many of these 25 and 64 Kodachrome at TIFF using the optimum settings for the machine, I got mega bit reading from 175 to 250 million.  That fidelity to the original slide seemed to work in down-loading the images onto a dual-layer Memorex disk and attaching the disk to the text of the article.  Magazines weren't nearly as selective as SS.

Considering SS rejects because of 'noise,' I suspect the very high mega-bit count will have 'noise.'  My next attempt will be to move the Pacific settings to JPEG and lower the pixel count from 5000 per inch to something less until SS accepts one of these hybrid digitalized images somewhere in the 10 to 20-millions bit.  I can only go to 4 MB.

 

I cry knowing I have 1000s of potential SS images that are sitting because I haven't figured out a way to satisfy SS's rules....so, I asked on this page.

 

I am pleased you took the time to reply.  I hope you can offer more.

Sincerely,
Paul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I digitalized some slides and negatives. Had to work these images in Photoshop for cloning the dust spots, editing contrast/color and work too the grain. Part of the edition was downsizing in the last step.

Is better start with a big file, you have more room for edition and less artifacts.

Tiff is better, but depending on the hard is too possible work in JPG.

In case of Editorial images, sometimes SS is not to strict regarding noise.

From 35 m negative

stock-photo-new-york-usa-circa-september

From 35 mm Slide

stock-photo-cardon-cactus-trichocereus-p

From 6x7 negative

stock-photo-the-sun-over-the-wide-de-la-

I used a relatively simple Epson Perfection V600 Photo Scanner. Yours look better and ready for batch scanning.

Get the images approved here is a Trial and error method case. You will find a workflow for it.

PS: Sometimes get new images is the best excuse for revisiting places!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear Alfredo,

Thank you for your reply.  You are the first to give me hope that all is not lost and with a 'trial and error' method, I may have the opportunity to 'digitalize' 1000s of Kodachrome 25 and 64 slides.  I would be delighted.  Sincerely, Paul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My best selling image is from a scan of a 6x7mm slide on Fuji Velvia. I scanned this on a Polaroid PrintScan originally as a tiff and then sized it to SS size requirement as a jpeg. I have scanned some Kodachrome 25 & 64 slides on this scanner and I believe I have some approved. This was a high quality scanner dedicated to slides. It will take that kind of scanner to capture the detail and clarity. The best scan would be from a drum scanner but that is pricey and questionable from a payout standpoint. Cleaning the slides before scanning is critical; compressed air works well. Here is my image. On the second one I literally had to slightly blur the sky to get it approved by SS because of the perceived noise.

149914934.jpg

166159496.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back when my portfolio was on SS 99% of the images were made from scanned 4x5 transparencies. I used an Epson Perfection 4990 scanner, this was from 2004 to about 2012. Around 2012 I updated my iMac and the scanner quit working. Epson said that they no longer supported that model. Anyway here is how I scanned the transparencies. I started out making 8x10 inch scans but at the end I was making large scans, like 24x30 to something like 60x75 inches, and saving them as tiff files. It took 4 or 5 minutes to make each scan at 300 dpi. I used 16 bits per channel. I would work on the tiff file in Photoshop until it looked like the original film and then I would spend anywhere from 30 minutes to 12 hours cloning out the dust spots. It did not matter how well I cleaned the film there was always dust spots, newton rings, small scratches and fine fibers to be cloned out. I did the cloning at 300 to 500%. Remember that with a flat bed transparency scanner you are dealing with 4 surfaces that can collect dust. I would save the large tiff file for further use and make a jpg to upload. I only made a few 35mm scans of Kodachrome 25 and 64 slides. I never uploaded any of these because I had returned to all the places and reshot them on 4x5 Velvia 50. I have scanned many 35mm B&W negs. I think I would scan them to 11x16.5 inches. I tried using the Digital Ice to remove the dust and small scratches but it increased the scan time and did not work too well. I see that the scanner you have has Magic Touch to do the same thing, I hope it works better than the Digital Ice.

I think starting out large and resizing them smaller later is the way to go. That way you have a large, color corrected, cleaned up tiff file to use as your original and you can make it as small as and as jpg as it needs to be depending on the application. Maybe not 60x75 inches, a 4x5 transparency is something like 13 times larger than a 35mm slide. I'm guessing that a decent size might be somewhere between 8.5x11 and 11x14 inches. I think, like noted above, testing to see what size works the best and what SS will accept would be the smartest way to go about the task. 

I have no knowledge, except looking at the web page, of the PACIFIC IMAGES ELECTRONICS power slide 5000 scanner.

Take a look at my website: http://www.mikenortonphotography.com. All of the images except the ones in the Panorama Portfolio were photographed on film.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Michael Warwick said:

My best selling image is from a scan of a 6x7mm slide on Fuji Velvia. I scanned this on a Polaroid PrintScan originally as a tiff and then sized it to SS size requirement as a jpeg. I have scanned some Kodachrome 25 & 64 slides on this scanner and I believe I have some approved. This was a high quality scanner dedicated to slides. It will take that kind of scanner to capture the detail and clarity. The best scan would be from a drum scanner but that is pricey and questionable from a payout standpoint. Cleaning the slides before scanning is critical; compressed air works well. Here is my image. On the second one I literally had to slightly blur the sky to get it approved by SS because of the perceived noise.

149914934.jpg

166159496.jpg

Dear Michael, My Pacific Image scanner cost $1100 5-years ago and I did 'due-diligence' in finding a suitable scanner that would hold 50-images.  I finely ended up do the images one-at-a-time with zero failures while the fed-slides from the holder would 'malfunction' and halt the scan or fail to fed properly resulting in a partial scan I would not discover until the whole holder was finished...very annoying. 

Nosey question was your scanner more expensive? 

Nikon offered one at $8k...too much. When I scanned from slide to TIFF, I used a small camera lens brush and 'dusted' both sides.  Air cans would cost too much when you scan 1000s of images. It took me most of 2-years to get through all of the slides and then down-load from the computer to the 8.2 GB dual-layer Memorex disk when formatted offered 7.9 GB of space. I could get 42 to 45 TIFF on this disk. My 'photo-shop' skills are zero which probably doesn't help my cause.

 

Thank you for your time and information. Sincerely, Paul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul, I think my scanner was around $2000 but at $50 a drum scan, I bit the bullet and bought it. It scanned 67 slides up to 4000dpi but I typically did them at 3000dpi which was still a good size tiff file. It would scan 35mm at 2000dpi. I would use a soft slide cleaning cloth which would work pretty well. I still would have to go through them enlarged to clean them up. The healing brush in PS was indispensable. I too would save them to a disk and I still have a few hundred disks. I don't know if you can get drum quality scans cheaply these days. I tried an online place that raved about their scans and had good reviews but the quality was awful. I don't think a flatbed scanner will give you what you need for Shutterstock. It's frustrating because you know K 25 and 64 slides can be very sharp but it is not cheap to turn them in to good digital images without expensive equipment...a dilemma. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, mikenorton said:

Back when my portfolio was on SS 99% of the images were made from scanned 4x5 transparencies. I used an Epson Perfection 4990 scanner, this was from 2004 to about 2012. Around 2012 I updated my iMac and the scanner quit working. Epson said that they no longer supported that model. Anyway here is how I scanned the transparencies. I started out making 8x10 inch scans but at the end I was making large scans, like 24x30 to something like 60x75 inches, and saving them as tiff files. It took 4 or 5 minutes to make each scan at 300 dpi. I used 16 bits per channel. I would work on the tiff file in Photoshop until it looked like the original film and then I would spend anywhere from 30 minutes to 12 hours cloning out the dust spots. It did not matter how well I cleaned the film there was always dust spots, newton rings, small scratches and fine fibers to be cloned out. I did the cloning at 300 to 500%. Remember that with a flat bed transparency scanner you are dealing with 4 surfaces that can collect dust. I would save the large tiff file for further use and make a jpg to upload. I only made a few 35mm scans of Kodachrome 25 and 64 slides. I never uploaded any of these because I had returned to all the places and reshot them on 4x5 Velvia 50. I have scanned many 35mm B&W negs. I think I would scan them to 11x16.5 inches. I tried using the Digital Ice to remove the dust and small scratches but it increased the scan time and did not work too well. I see that the scanner you have has Magic Touch to do the same thing, I hope it works better than the Digital Ice.

I think starting out large and resizing them smaller later is the way to go. That way you have a large, color corrected, cleaned up tiff file to use as your original and you can make it as small as and as jpg as it needs to be depending on the application. Maybe not 60x75 inches, a 4x5 transparency is something like 13 times larger than a 35mm slide. I'm guessing that a decent size might be somewhere between 8.5x11 and 11x14 inches. I think, like noted above, testing to see what size works the best and what SS will accept would be the smartest way to go about the task. 

I have no knowledge, except looking at the web page, of the PACIFIC IMAGES ELECTRONICS power slide 5000 scanner.

Take a look at my website: http://www.mikenortonphotography.com. All of the images except the ones in the Panorama Portfolio were photographed on film.

Dear mike,

You have helped me more than you will know.  My Pacific scanner may accomplish what I hope for with insight after reading what you have accomplished and from folks like you who take the time to offer their experiences with their slides.  Then, I get to 'tinker' with my scanner.  I see more than 20K Kodachrome 25 and 64 slides sitting in their LOGAN 1500 Double Decker Slide Files whispering to me...GET US DIGITALZIED NOW!!!

Again, my thanks. Sincerely, Paul

P.S. Opened your website...nice work.

Edited by Paul Richard Jones
Additional reply

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Paul Richard Jones said:

Dear mike,

You have helped me more than you will know.  My Pacific scanner may accomplish what I hope for with insight after reading what you have accomplished and from folks like you who take the time to offer their experiences with their slides.  Then, I get to 'tinker' with my scanner.  I see more than 20K Kodachrome 25 and 64 slides sitting in their LOGAN 1500 Double Decker Slide Files whispering to me...GET US DIGITALZIED NOW!!!

Again, my thanks. Sincerely, Paul

P.S. Opened your website...nice work.

Thanks for the nice words about my images and the help! 

Let me know if you run into any questions and let us all know how the scanning and uploading turns out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/12/2017 at 0:28 PM, Michael Warwick said:

My best selling image is from a scan of a 6x7mm slide on Fuji Velvia.

Super cool. I have a 6 x 7cm Velvia 100 transparency which I had printed with a lab's help and the print sold in an exhibition and also won Second Prize (at the same exhibition.) The same image also won a competition organised by a photography magazine. Though it has not sold in stock. I actually wanted to use Velvia 50 for the shoot but it had just been discontinued and Velvia 100 was only available at that time. By the way, I like your suspension bridge time exposure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but it seems like to speed up the operation I would sort the slides into three batches: for stock, for exhibition/other sales and trashcan (you know which ones.)

Those for stock (SS) I would scan as large jpegs since that's faster. If they initially look good in PS, I would then save those as tiffs and work on them later for dust, etc., finally resaving them as jpegs for submission. I know you lose something as jpeg scans, but it's penny stock, remember.

The other batch I would scan as tiffs and work them in PS.

The third batch, well...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, John Orsbun said:

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but it seems like to speed up the operation I would sort the slides into three batches: for stock, for exhibition/other sales and trashcan (you know which ones.)

Those for stock (SS) I would scan as large jpegs since that's faster. If they initially look good in PS, I would then save those as tiffs and work on them later for dust, etc., finally resaving them as jpegs for submission. I know you lose something as jpeg scans, but it's penny stock, remember.

The other batch I would scan as tiffs and work them in PS.

The third batch, well...

 

 

I would scan all slides at maximum resolution - TIFF or JPG at maximum quality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I scanned all my 35mm, 6x7cm and 4x5" slides using my digital camera (Nikon D80, D90 or D600) and a Micro-Nikkor 105mm f2.8. It's fast and simple but only some 35mm slides are suitable for copying. They have to be razor sharp to start with. Noise/grain in blue skies is best selectively softened.

As an aside, I see that Nikon USA on their site with details about the new Nikon D850 ($3,300) lists a new slide copier attachment ($140 excl. 60mm micro-Nikkor) for digitizing 35mm slides and negative films which the camera automatically turns into positives. It's interesting because Nikon discontinued its line of scanners some years ago. Because there was still a big demand for high-quality scanners, the prices of these top-of-the-range scanners more than doubled for secondhand examples on eBay (asking price for the Nikon ED5000 scanner for 35mm seems to be around $2,000 on eBay today).

http://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-products/product/dslr-cameras/d850.html

59d108d8a5c93_Screenshot1452017-10-0117_23_58.jpg.66a427c7893cce7fcbf53ed48469f1eb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had no idea the Nikon 5000-ED scanner commanded such a high price now. I should have kept it! Back, maybe ten years ago, I digitized a few of my 30,000 Kodachromes. Only a few made it through SS's approval process. Even those that were accepted took a great deal of time to make acceptable. In the end, I decided it was not worth the effort.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now