 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / General Photo Topics / General Topics / September 200635mm file ---> Digital File inexpensively
Here's the scoop: 1. I am not a serious photographer. 2. I am not don't need auto-everything. 3. My kids are playing a lot of sports, and my (inexpensive) digital camera is driving me nuts. The shutter delay and small zoom just don't cut it. 4. No way I can justify a digital SLR for the small number of pictures I take. I dug up my old Pentax K1000 with an 80 - 205 zoom lens (Vivitar 3.8). The flash hot shoe is dead. Instead of paying a service guy, I just bought an ME Super body on ebay for $35. I just got the camera, and it works great. I plan on taking film pictures at my kid's games. I need a cheap way to process the film to either a CD or an online account. Most of the pictures I take are not worth printing. Ideally I would like to drop the film in a mailer, send it in, and either get a CD back or just go online and see the scans. I would then just get prints of what I want. I think in many cases, I would just email a relatively low-res version to the grandparents and other relatives so they can see what the kids are doing. Does anyone have suggestions for inexpensive processing / scanning. Walgreens wants 5 bucks for the CD, plus they require that I buy the prints at 8.99. That's 14 bucks for 24 exposures. Since most of my pictures are junk, that's a pretty big waste of money. I have tried searching google. I get a ton of hits for services, but none seem to offer what I want. I would think that if I am just getting the negatives developed and scanned, the whole thing should be in the 5.00/role range. Based on what I want to do, would slide film be better? Thanks, Mac > Here's the scoop: > [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > > Mac > Does anyone have suggestions for inexpensive processing / scanning. > Walgreens wants 5 bucks for the CD, plus they require that I buy the prints > at 8.99. That's 14 bucks for 24 exposures. Since most of my pictures are > junk, that's a pretty big waste of money. What kind of files are on the CD? I used to get my film processed and have the images stored on a Kodak Photo CD. The price for the CD was higher, but it has been 6 or 7 years since I went digital and the price may have changed. The photo CDs could hold the contents of several rolls of film, somewhat more than 100 images per CD and with multi-session CDs it was possible to bring the CD back to the photo shop to get another roll or two's worth of pictures added to the CD. Each image was stored in (IIRC) 4 resolutions, the largest taking up approximately 4 MB per image, and there was no requirement to have any prints made. My cost per print (including HP paper & ink) was less than what would have been charged by most photo shops when making larger prints, and even less when I made up to 6 prints per 8 1/2 x 11 sheet. > 3. My kids are playing a lot of sports, and my (inexpensive) digital camera > is driving me nuts. The shutter delay and small zoom just don't cut it. > 4. No way I can justify a digital SLR for the small number of pictures I > take. You might want to check some of the reviews of relatively inexpensive digital cameras that use NuCore's image processor chip (CleanCapture SiP 1280). Two such are Kyocera's FineCam M410R and Epson's PhotoPC L-410. They were examined in Digital Photographer's November issue (Editor's Report and also the Digital Insider column), and while there was no mention of shutter delay it does something else that could be useful for sports photography. They have an unusual burst mode that allows you to not only shoot continuously until the SD card is filled (2 fps for the Kyocera, 3 fps for the Epson), but the cameras also autofocus and reevaluate the exposure between shots. The NuCore chips are also used in Kyocera's smaller SL300RT, SL300R and S5R, but evidently don't have the autofocus/autoexposure feature of the M410R while shooting continuously. A picture of the Kyocera's lens shows that it is 10x ("f=5.7-57mm/2.8-3.1"). The smaller Epson L-410, $399 MSRP, has only a 3x zoom (5.6-16.8mm) but it can record 30 fps videos at up to 640x480 resolution. What I like about it is that for power it uses a pair of AAs (Lithium or NiMH) as well as a CR-V3. <snip> > Does anyone have suggestions for inexpensive processing / scanning. > Walgreens wants 5 bucks for the CD, plus they require that I buy the prints > at 8.99. That's 14 bucks for 24 exposures. Since most of my pictures are > junk, that's a pretty big waste of money. <snip> I live in Sydney (Australia). Around here there are Kodak "image magic" kiosks that will develop, scan and burn to CD for $6.50 a 12 exp roll. Perhaps there is a similar service near you? >Ideally I would like to drop the film in a mailer, send it in, and either >get a CD back or just go online and see the scans. I would then just get >prints of what I want. I think in many cases, I would just email a >relatively low-res version to the grandparents and other relatives so they >can see what the kids are doing. You might give Mpix a try: http://www.mpix.com/FilmServices.aspx I do my own developing, so I've never used their film developing services, but I'm extremely pleased with their print quality for the digital files I upload. $4 to develop a 24 exposure roll and then 30 cents apiece for 4x6 prints. Only caveat is that it's $5 per order for shipping. I usually end up ordering $50 or so worth of prints each time, so the $5 isn't significant. -- Eric http://canid.com/ > Here's the scoop: > [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] > > Mac Check out Clark Color Labs, http://www.clarkcolor.com/. We used their services for years before we went all digital. I know it is not recommended but one work around is to just have the film processed and use the following http://www.tom-elliott-photography.com/hp-scanner.html I used that for a while then purchased the MICROTEK 5900 with a built in 4x5 inch transprency adapter which did and does a better job. For my commercial client based asignments I use PHOTO CDs or PRO PHOTO CD. Have fun. Tom > Here's the scoop: > [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > > Mac > Does anyone have suggestions for inexpensive processing / scanning. I get reasonable scans using a nasty cheap HP Photosmart S20 that I got on auction for about US$50. Have printed from scans at 8x10 after editing. There are much better scanners available and might save you a few bucks. > 3. My kids are playing a lot of sports, > and my (inexpensive) digital camera is > driving me nuts. The shutter delay and > small zoom just don't cut it. > 4. No way I can justify a digital SLR > for the small number of pictures I take. Very high quality film cameras are very inexpensive today. Even near top of the line models, like the Minolta Maxxum 7, can be found priced under $400. And these cameras often have features similar to what you might find in the very most expensive digital cameras. > I dug up my old Pentax K1000 with an > 80 - 205 zoom lens (Vivitar 3.8). The > flash hot shoe is dead. Instead of paying > a service guy, I just bought an ME Super > body on ebay for $35. I still have an old Pentax SP-500 that continues to work like a charm to this day. I took it out for a few hours last summer and was amazed at how simple it was to use and how good the pictures came out. It certainly isn't going to replace my Maxxum 7 for serious work, but I have no intention of getting rid of it. > I need a cheap way to process the film > to either a CD or an online account. > Most of the pictures I take are not > worth printing. (snip) You can save a considerable amount of money by using high volume mail order processing labs, most of which provide a wide range of services for both film and digital photographers. Some of the most widely advertised (in magazines) are... PhotoWorks: http://www.photoworks.com/ Clark Color Labs: http://www.clarkcolor.com/ MPix: http://www.mpix.com/FilmServices.aspx > Ideally I would like to drop the film in a > mailer, send it in, and either get a CD > back or just go online and see the > scans. I would then just get prints of > what I want. (snip) That is how film is often handled by mail order services like those above. > I have tried searching google. I get a ton > of hits for services, but none seem to offer > what I want. (snip) Another option is a outdated or used film scanner. Scanners being replaced with newer models are occasionally heavily discounted and used models can be found fairly easily. > Based on what I want to do, would slide > film be better? If you're not that serious about photography, stick with the more forgiving, and less technically demanding, print film. Stewart The cheapest I found was at Costco, which simply transfers negatives to a CD for $.29 apiece. > Does anyone have suggestions for inexpensive processing / scanning. > Walgreens wants 5 bucks for the CD, plus they require that I buy the prints [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Mac There are several online photo services. Try Snapfish (www.snapfish.com) and they will process just the negatives and post online for 2.99 a roll.. about 6.99 with prints. Or find a film scanner, and just have the negatives processed. Any photo processor will do this for you and then scan them yourself. Jim Shutterfly is another option. http://www.bwca.cc/misc/freephoto.htm "Jim Nason" <jenhome somecommoncharacter comast.net> wrote in message news:2005010507093516807%jenhomesomecommoncharactercomastnet@news.comcast.gi ganews.com... > > Does anyone have suggestions for inexpensive processing / scanning. > > Walgreens wants 5 bucks for the CD, plus they require that I buy the prints [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > Jim Costco is the cheapest, i think. Prints are 19 cents. Patrick > Here's the scoop: <SNIP> > Ideally I would like to drop the film in a mailer, send it in, and either > get a CD back or just go online and see the scans. I would then just get > prints of what I want. I think in many cases, I would just email a > relatively low-res version to the grandparents and other relatives so they > can see what the kids are doing. Target lets me develop and CD only. Developing is two or three bucks and the cd is 5. The big PITA is explaining to them what I want every time I go in there. -- Regards, Matt Clara www.mattclara.com |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.