| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/16/2003 01:21:48 PM · #1 |
I recently went to the local camera club meeting. I was surprised to see that most of its members also belong to the AARP. I didn't know at all what to expect in terms of the quality of their stuff. I was pleasantly surprised to find out that I'll fit in pretty well. They aren't a bunch of pro photographers who just get together, but a bunch of hobby photographers like my wife and I just getting out twice a month to show their stuff and talk about photography stuff. They have print categories for their open topics, but slides only for nature.
Does anyone know of anywhere that does slides from digital images reasonably and without having to resample to huge sizes? I've been looking and some of the places want as much as $15 for one slide. That's preposterous!! I'd almost rather have something on-line so I can upload to it rather than have to bring in a CD with a couple images on it. I'd pay a couple bucks a slide. $4 or $5 seems a little steep.
Thanks for any help you guys can offer.
BoB |
|
|
|
05/16/2003 01:38:09 PM · #2 |
| How bout you go out get yourself a nice used slr manual. I got mine for $175. Its a pentax MX. Not one of those crappy new cameras where it does all the work for you and if you drop it will shatter into a million peices. My Pentax is built like a tank. Not only will slide film cost you only $5-$12 dependending where you go, it will only cost you around $8-$14 to process. So instead of paying 15 bucks for just one slide you could up to 26 and get back 36 slides. Who is charging 15 bucks anyways? I'd ask around places coz sometimes prices from place to place can be a big difference, for instance, all the places around where I live will charge around 9 dollars for a roll of slide film. But If I treck myself out to the store out 20 miles in a different town they charge only $3 a roll. But you should really consider getting yourself a real camera, they are inexspensive due to the digital era and the quality is outrageous compared to most digital, esepcially if you know what you are doing. |
|
|
|
05/16/2003 01:54:24 PM · #3 |
Originally posted by Ricky Cleave:
How bout you go out get yourself a nice used slr manual.... especially if you know what you are doing. |
Well I've taken my share of film pics and the biggest reason I hate film is that you have to get it developed. I don't think my wife and I have taken 2 rolls of film in the last year, yet there are a dozen rolls in the cabinet that need to be developed. I don't have a lot of desire to get an slr that isn't digital. I make way too many mistakes. I found a place online (finally!) that makes slides for a more reasonable price.. //www.iqimaging.com/
Anyone ever used them? they are economical, but are they any good?
I'll still take suggestions if you have them. I'm not done looking yet myself.
Thanks - BoB
|
|
|
|
05/16/2003 01:57:56 PM · #4 |
| I get it, yeah mistakes suck. Especially if you really were looking foward to seeing that well-composed photograph to only find that it was overexsposed or underexsposed by 1 f-stop. |
|
|
|
05/16/2003 02:08:12 PM · #5 |
Perhaps this is a good thread to post my most recent photography-related experience:
I just had my first couple of sessions in the darkroom and it was a blast! I never knew making b&w prints would be so fun!
Without turning into a digital vs. film debate, shooting digital has really reduced the number of crappy shots I make...making my film shooting more enjoyable...sometimes if I want to go for a real nice b&w print, I shoot with my digital first until it looks just right, then shoot off a couple of frames of film...
Point is, there's something to using BOTH mediums instead of choosing one form over the other. I'm now shooting 50% digital, 50% film.
Of course, you have to enjoy developping and printing film yourself, otherwise, its less fun...
as for making slides of prints, everyone I've asked said this process is really expensive... I don't know how feasible it is using a digital image projector and then shooting the image with regular slide film yourself...
Originally posted by inspzil:
Originally posted by Ricky Cleave:
How bout you go out get yourself a nice used slr manual.... especially if you know what you are doing. |
Well I've taken my share of film pics and the biggest reason I hate film is that you have to get it developed. I don't think my wife and I have taken 2 rolls of film in the last year, yet there are a dozen rolls in the cabinet that need to be developed. I don't have a lot of desire to get an slr that isn't digital. I make way too many mistakes. I found a place online (finally!) that makes slides for a more reasonable price.. //www.iqimaging.com/
Anyone ever used them? they are economical, but are they any good?
I'll still take suggestions if you have them. I'm not done looking yet myself.
Thanks - BoB |
|
|
|
|
05/16/2003 02:17:07 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by sylandrix:
Perhaps this is a good thread to post my most recent photography-related experience:
I just had my first couple of sessions in the darkroom and it was a blast! I never knew making b&w prints would be so fun!
Without turning into a digital vs. film debate, shooting digital has really reduced the number of crappy shots I make...making my film shooting more enjoyable...sometimes if I want to go for a real nice b&w print, I shoot with my digital first until it looks just right, then shoot off a couple of frames of film...
Point is, there's something to using BOTH mediums instead of choosing one form over the other. I'm now shooting 50% digital, 50% film.
Of course, you have to enjoy developping and printing film yourself, otherwise, its less fun...
as for making slides of prints, everyone I've asked said this process is really expensive... I don't know how feasible it is using a digital image projector and then shooting the image with regular slide film yourself...
|
What's with the resonable position! Isn't that supposed to be a point of wide extremes - you can't go and be sane and shoot both digital and film!
On making slides, at a recent meeting I was at, people were using copy slides made from prints. The quality is not amazing, but certainly good enough to look at the pictures, discuss the composition, colour etc. They were made from 4x6 prints, then shot with a film SLR, on slide film. You could print your digital pictures and make slides from this way pretty cheaply. Just another option - depends on how much you want to spend vs how good you want them to look. |
|
|
|
05/16/2003 02:21:34 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by inspzil:
I found a place online (finally!) that makes slides for a more reasonable price.. //www.iqimaging.com/
Anyone ever used them? they are economical, but are they any good?
I'll still take suggestions if you have them. I'm not done looking yet myself.
Thanks - BoB |
If you do try these guys out, please let us know how you get on. Reading their pages it sounds like they are really more set up for powerpoint type slide production. I noticed they have a 100k per image file limit for example - that's less than you get here... |
|
|
|
05/16/2003 02:32:05 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
...On making slides, at a recent meeting I was at, people were using copy slides made from prints. The quality is not amazing, but certainly good enough to look at the pictures, discuss the composition, colour etc. They were made from 4x6 prints, then shot with a film SLR, on slide film. You could print your digital pictures and make slides from this way pretty cheaply. Just another option - depends on how much you want to spend vs how good you want them to look. |
Well I found //www.prodigitalphotos.com/price.html that looks like it has pretty decent prices. I mess up enough pictures as it is with my digital. If I can mess up with a digital camera, think of the possible damage I could do with an SLR? I hate to think of messing up perfectly good film doing something silly like taking pictures of pictures, poorly. It'd be different if I was GOOD at it.
I don't need to have a lot done. The club only requires slides for the "nature" topic. The others can be done with prints. I'd probably get 10 or so done maybe every other month. Buying a camera and all that stuff seems like it might be a little extraneous for that. If it came right down to it, I'd just skip "nature" altogether. |
|
|
|
05/16/2003 02:37:56 PM · #9 |
It sounded like you already had a film camera - you can run slide film through a 35mm point and shoot as well. Would cost about a dollar per slide I'd guess.
That prodigitalphotos sounded like a good option though - I'd be interested to hear how you get on.
Message edited by author 2003-05-16 14:42:58. |
|
|
|
05/16/2003 02:45:44 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
It sounded like you already had a film camera - you can run slide film through a 35mm point and shoot as well. Would cost about a dollar per slide I'd guess. |
I do have a film camera and it is a pretty cheap point and shoot. It takes decent pictures but has zero adjustment. I think you can turn the flash on or off and it has 3x zoom. Can you get slide film in 12 exp rolls? I can only enter a maximum of 8 slides per month, if I forego entering prints altogether. I don't have anything for slides at all, so pretty much all I need them for is this club.
Thanks for your input Gordon.
Bob
Oh wait, I almost forgot, I can SCAN slides :) But somehow I don't think it'd do any good..... |
|
|
|
05/16/2003 03:20:46 PM · #11 |
I didn't mean shooting everything in both digital and film... Occasionally I choose film over digital when I'm somewhere, and sometimes, on shots I can set up, after I get a nice digital shot and I think it will look good in B&W, I fire off some rolls...
Originally posted by Gordon:
What's with the resonable position! Isn't that supposed to be a point of wide extremes - you can't go and be sane and shoot both digital and film!
|
|
|
|
|
05/16/2003 03:58:31 PM · #12 |
The place I work gets slides made at Cantoo in Berkeley (www.cantoo.com). I don't know what their prices are currently, but the quality is good -- photographic, not presentation slides.
Your image should be at least 2048x1366 pixels (about 8mb uncompressed) for good quality. |
|
|
|
05/16/2003 04:07:38 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
The place I work gets slides made at Cantoo in Berkeley (www.cantoo.com). I don't know what their prices are currently, but the quality is good -- photographic, not presentation slides.
Your image should be at least 2048x1366 pixels (about 8mb uncompressed) for good quality. |
Cantoo do 4000 line powerpoint quality slides for 3.50 and 8000 line for $5.00
For photographic quality output (photoshop/bitmaps/ raster files) the price is $6.00 for 4000 line or $8 per slide for 8000 line, plus you've got the upload time for those probably 8Mb or so files per slide
Message edited by author 2003-05-16 16:07:59. |
|
|
|
06/13/2003 12:16:35 PM · #14 |
any luck with doing this ? I have several pictures that I'd like to get slides made from.
Right now I'm going to just buy slide film and take shots of inkjet and frontier 4x6 prints to make the slides. I'd really like to find a more convinent option to do only a few slides. |
|
|
|
06/13/2003 02:07:25 PM · #15 |
Bob,
Do they have a TV where you meet? Maybe you could start a small change with them and introduce digital. Bring a DVD player and CD with your pics. Just an idea
tracy
|
|
|
|
07/08/2003 03:09:43 PM · #16 |
|
|
|
07/08/2003 03:28:10 PM · #17 |
I have been looking into this as well and came across slides.com
Any thoughts on this place?
|
|
|
|
07/08/2003 03:38:16 PM · #18 |
we have a service bureau here in washington that does it for about $5 an image. i've done it and they're almost indistinguishable from a real slide - and this was using digital files from a Nikon D1 (which is only in the 2mpx range). They are called 'Condor Imaging Services'. They may have a website, I haven't looked.
if you live in a major metropolitan area, there should be service providers local to you. i've never tried any online providers.
|
|
|
|
07/08/2003 03:50:04 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by magnetic9999:
we have a service bureau here in washington that does it for about $5 an image. i've done it and they're almost indistinguishable from a real slide - and this was using digital files from a Nikon D1 (which is only in the 2mpx range). They are called 'Condor Imaging Services'. They may have a website, I haven't looked.
if you live in a major metropolitan area, there should be service providers local to you. i've never tried any online providers. |
My problem is my cost point is about $2 per slide. $5 seems way too high (mainly because I can do about 36 for $10 if I shoot them on slide film and get it developed)
Lots of places seem to do it for $5 or more. I'm looking for reasonable quality but am frankly more concerned about cost as these slides are just being made for review/ discussion of the pictures. |
|
|
|
07/08/2003 05:15:15 PM · #20 |
photography clubs in general are not that 'digital-friendly' yet. a LOT of "film people" still are closed to accepting digital as "real" photography. i work in the same organization as 3 architectural photographers (8x10 view cameras), and they all "hate" digital. It's not really a rational-seeming hatred. Seems based on some obsolete ideas of what digital was in 1995.
I think as digital gets more and more penetration, there's going to be a rethinking of how people share their images in camera clubs.
|
|
|
|
07/08/2003 05:29:00 PM · #21 |
If you have a really good inkjet printer you might try printing the equivalent of a contact sheet onto transparency material, cut them up, and mount them. I printed some anatomy "slides" onto inkjet transparencies (full-sized) and they were shown using an overhead projector with good results.
You might also consider printing them somewhat larger onto good paper (or use photo prints), and having them copied at the appropriate reduction onto transparency material on a "regular" color copier--the reduction to obscure any inkjet "artifacts." |
|
|
|
07/08/2003 05:29:26 PM · #22 |
In a brief survey of some of the photographers in the group I'm working with, almost all 'hate' digital in one way or another, yet a significant number of them couldn't tell which of my prints were digital and which were film - which seemed to confuse them for a while.
I think many people hear digital and think either horrible artefacts, over sharpened, pixelated and generally nasty, or they think 'cheating' cutting and pasting stuff, montage, fakery.
Also any of the medium format and above crowd have a similar issue with 35mm film anyway, so digital is bound to have a hard time. |
|
|
|
07/08/2003 05:30:42 PM · #23 |
And why the heck doesn't Fuji put their same emulsions onto a transparent backing material? Then any of our prints could become transparencies for display or projection.
Message edited by author 2003-07-08 17:31:17. |
|
|
|
07/08/2003 05:33:03 PM · #24 |
actually, if you have an overhead projector, you can print your shots on transparencies with your inkjet, and project them that way ....
|
|
|
|
07/08/2003 05:59:35 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
In a brief survey of some of the photographers in the group I'm working with, almost all 'hate' digital in one way or another, yet a significant number of them couldn't tell which of my prints were digital and which were film - which seemed to confuse them for a while.
I think many people hear digital and think either horrible artefacts, over sharpened, pixelated and generally nasty, or they think 'cheating' cutting and pasting stuff, montage, fakery.
Also any of the medium format and above crowd have a similar issue with 35mm film anyway, so digital is bound to have a hard time. |
I've been surprised at the people in our camera club. They said they would accept digital images, at the first meeting, but kinda grumbled about it. Speak the words "photo" and "shop" in the same sentence and the president has to rant for a few minutes. My wife and I watch the first meeting, whispering amongst ourselves as the judging happens. Some of my poorest DPC shots would rock.
The second meeting when we were allowed to compete, we put our stuff up for the judges. My wife and I both enter our allotted 2 B&W. Apparently no one has entered B&W in some time. One of my pictures pulls 14 out of 15. That pretty much stopped the grumbling about digital. When the color prints are shown, my office art pic is one of the last ones shown. I think everyone with prints left wanted it to be the last one. I don't think anyone wanted to follow it. They spent a good 2 extra minutes on that print, I think trying to figure out what it was.
After the competition there is critique. I think everyone there was stunned to find out my wife and my photos were shot with digital. There is one old guy there probably mid 70's who is also shooting digital. He was the first one to come up and introduce himself to me and congratulate me on taking some good photos. Quite a few others approached me later. Even the couple guys who are shooting digital with far nicer cameras than we have (10D, D60, Fuji S2).
I still need slides to do nature shots... which is what prompted this thread. The few guys who are shooting digital (who I haven't seen compete yet) are all relatives of others in the club. The discussions have started for incorporating rules for digital users. Most of the members don't care how much editing we do, as long as it looks good. The president is just a hardcore film guy and likely will delay the editing rules talk for another year, which means another year of unlimited editing. Kind of ironic isn't it?
I think in my group of not-so-esteemed photographers, I've changed most of their opinions on the power of digital. Hopefully we all can do a little to abolish film-snobbery.
Bob
I figure since I started this thread, I can go off topic and be forgiven.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 03/12/2025 06:59:05 PM EDT.
