35mm film for scanning

[oniznorb]

My 35mm SLR is sitting there doing nothing, so I want to start using it again.

I suspect slide film will be more suitable than negative for scanning .

Pros :
Better colour ?
Easier to see the image before scanning
Finer grain

Cons:
More expensive to buy and process
More complex processing

Any comments ?

[Major Bloodnok]

Actually (colour) negatives are a bit easier to scan than transparencies. The minimal latitude of slide film means that you have to get your exposure perfect and, even then, the contrast can be pretty high. This means that you can get iffy shadow areas (depending on the quality of the scanner). If you're going to use transparency film, go for something like Provia rather than Velvia - Velvia is highly saturated and it can be a pain controlling the colours in the scan. Provia's a bit more natural and easier to work with. Personally, if you don't want to use black and white (easiest of the lot), I'd go for something like Kodak Portra NC (Natural Colour - not the VC, or Vivid Colour, version). Easy to scan and minimal grain.

When scanning, avoid the temptation to get your final image straight out of the scanner - you want a fairly 'flat' scan, and then adjust it for contrast, curves, etc in your image processing software. If it can handle it, scan to a 16-bit TIFF, as this'll give you more freedom to adjust the image to your liking before it starts to degrade.

This was scanned from Portra 160 NC (admittedly, it's 120 format, so a bit cleaner than you'll get from 35mm). It's also been fairly heavily processed to really push the contrast and definition. If I've got time, I'll upload another one that's more representative of what you get with more standard post-processing.


Green doorway by Cap'n Maj Bloodnok, on Flickr

[oniznorb]

Thanks for the advice Denis.