Scanning 10,000 slides?!

[etonblue]

i have just- very tentatively- agreed to a job that will require me to
scan over 10,000 color slides the sole purpose of which is to be
displayed, in what seems to me to be an interminable number of slide
shows, on a television set; more specifically a 50some inch plasma
television set (of an as yet undetermined resolution, but for the sake
of arguement, lets say it is 1080i which, as i understand it, would
mean that each image will need to be 1920x1080).

this represents a nice opportunity for me, as the payment will not be
inconsiderable and my client has a realistic deadline (ie. it's done
when it's done)- so i can work on this in dribs and drabs when things
are slow.

up until now, i have used a succession of flatbed epson perfection
photo scanners for my mostly medium format and 4x5 negatives. however,
i don't relish hand scanning 10,000 slides.

i've been perusing the group and various scanner review sites and the
scanner that has caught my eye is the Nikon Super Coolscan 5000,
primarily for the ability to batch scan 50 slides at a time. but it is
well over $1,000USD and it seems overkill to spend a thousand dollars
simply for batch scanning capabilities when i'll be scanning the slides
at a relatively low resolution.

so i guess what i'm asking is: is there a lower cost solution film
scanner for scanning a very LARGE number of slides for display on a
HDTV?

thanks in advance,

eb

 

[Ralf R. Radermacher]

so i guess what i'm asking is: is there a lower cost solution film
scanner for scanning a very LARGE number of slides for display on a
HDTV?

How about this one...

http://www.ephotozine.com/equipment/tests/testdetail.cfm?test_id=322

Never seen or used it myself but might fit your bill. Certainly very
handy if the slides are already in magazines.

Ralf

 

[Dierk Haasis]

i've been perusing the group and various scanner review sites and the
scanner that has caught my eye is the Nikon Super Coolscan 5000,
primarily for the ability to batch scan 50 slides at a time. but it is
well over $1,000USD

Business-wise these $ 1,000 are a very good investment in your case,
particularly if you are paid good money as you suggest.

The first thing I thought when I read the subject line was, "Go, get
em on Kodak PhotoCD [not PictureCD!]". I don't know what the cost at
the moment is for one CD with a 100 scans but it may pay. Another idea
was to get them to a lab and let them scan with a drum scanner, but I
guess that won't pay, otherwise your customer would have come up with
that. It depends on a simple equation - subtract your cost from what
you get. Does it leave enough?

If this is the only time you will have to work on such a big job, drum
scanners are out. That leaves - besides the Nikon - any half-decent
flatbed scanner with a transparency/film holder covering the complete
scan area (about 12-20 pics?!). The only ones I know that can do that
are about 3-10x more expensive than the Nikon.

 

[CSM1]

i have just- very tentatively- agreed to a job that will require me to
scan over 10,000 color slides the sole purpose of which is to be
displayed, in what seems to me to be an interminable number of slide
shows, on a television set; more specifically a 50some inch plasma
television set (of an as yet undetermined resolution, but for the sake
of arguement, lets say it is 1080i which, as i understand it, would
mean that each image will need to be 1920x1080).

this represents a nice opportunity for me, as the payment will not be
inconsiderable and my client has a realistic deadline (ie. it's done
when it's done)- so i can work on this in dribs and drabs when things
are slow.

up until now, i have used a succession of flatbed epson perfection
photo scanners for my mostly medium format and 4x5 negatives. however,
i don't relish hand scanning 10,000 slides.

i've been perusing the group and various scanner review sites and the
scanner that has caught my eye is the Nikon Super Coolscan 5000,
primarily for the ability to batch scan 50 slides at a time. but it is
well over $1,000USD and it seems overkill to spend a thousand dollars
simply for batch scanning capabilities when i'll be scanning the slides
at a relatively low resolution.

so i guess what i'm asking is: is there a lower cost solution film
scanner for scanning a very LARGE number of slides for display on a
HDTV?

thanks in advance,

eb

For scanning 10,000 35 mm Slides, I do not consider a $1000 Nikon Super
Coolscan 5000 with batch scanning of 50 slides at a time to be a lot of
money.
Well it is closer to $1500, $1000 for the scanner and $480 for the SF-210
fifty slide feeder.

That scanner will pay for its self in the amount of time saving you will
have. The Digital ICE is a real help in cleaning up the image.

The average low cost scanner does not have the ability to scan more then
four slides at a time. And no Digital ICE. Each slide takes around three
minutes or more, to index, preview and final scan.

So 3 minutes times 10,000 sides is 30,000 minutes or 500 hours. That does
not count the time it takes to clean the slides and load the holder.

It takes me over an hour to scan 36 slides with my Minolta Scan Dual 4.

 

[(Pete Cresswell)]

RE/

http://www.ephotozine.com/equipment/tests/testdetail.cfm?test_id=322

Never seen or used it myself but might fit your bill. Certainly very
handy if the slides are already in magazines.

If the quality is acceptable, I'd take that over my Nikon in a heartbeat. The
Nikon batch feeder I have cost an arm-and-a-let and doesn't work that well -
definately not well enough for reliable unattended operation.

At purchase time, my little fantasy was that I'd load it up with a stack of
slides at night, go to bed, and find them all scanned when I woke up.

Only in my dreams.... OTOH, I had to scan a large number of old (40+ years)
do-it-yourself cardboard slides and that may have been a factor in the incessant
jams.

Others have noted that a credit card taped in the right place on the scanner
helps noticibly....but that's still really kludgy for a supposedly
big-name-quality product.

 

[Chris Birkett]

i have just- very tentatively- agreed to a job that will require me to
scan over 10,000 color slides the sole purpose of which is to be
displayed, in what seems to me to be an interminable number of slide
shows, on a television set; more specifically a 50some inch plasma
television set (of an as yet undetermined resolution, but for the sake
of arguement, lets say it is 1080i which, as i understand it, would
mean that each image will need to be 1920x1080).

this represents a nice opportunity for me, as the payment will not be
inconsiderable and my client has a realistic deadline (ie. it's done
when it's done)- so i can work on this in dribs and drabs when things
are slow.

up until now, i have used a succession of flatbed epson perfection
photo scanners for my mostly medium format and 4x5 negatives. however,
i don't relish hand scanning 10,000 slides.

i've been perusing the group and various scanner review sites and the
scanner that has caught my eye is the Nikon Super Coolscan 5000,
primarily for the ability to batch scan 50 slides at a time. but it is
well over $1,000USD and it seems overkill to spend a thousand dollars
simply for batch scanning capabilities when i'll be scanning the slides
at a relatively low resolution.

so i guess what i'm asking is: is there a lower cost solution film
scanner for scanning a very LARGE number of slides for display on a
HDTV?

thanks in advance,

eb

I recently started a scanning project of approximately 3000 slides, which
was eventually whittled down to 1200. I purchased a Coolscan V for this,
mainly because based on the payment I'm receiving and my financial situation
(i.e. dirt-poor student), I couldn't justify the extra cost of the 5000 and
bulk slide feeder. Because I use the computer for long periods of time, the
main difference for me is that I have to constantly change slides (the 5000
is also faster an an per-slide basis too, however). It really is a pain in
the ass, but no longer than I would be spending on the computer anyway.
Buying the scanner was mainly an oppertunity to upgrade my then current
scanner (a Minolta Scan Dual III) and benefit from ICE during the project.

It's really up to you to decide whether you want to be sitting in front of
the computer constantly changing slides for several hundred hours. Your
time may be worth more to you than the price difference between the 5000 and
a cheaper model.

- Chris

 

[etonblue]

If the quality is acceptable, I'd take that over my Nikon in a heartbeat. The
Nikon batch feeder I have cost an arm-and-a-let and doesn't work that well -
definately not well enough for reliable unattended operation.

At purchase time, my little fantasy was that I'd load it up with a stack of
slides at night, go to bed, and find them all scanned when I woke up.

Only in my dreams.... OTOH, I had to scan a large number of old (40+ years)
do-it-yourself cardboard slides and that may have been a factor in the incessant
jams.

eek. is your nikon the super coolscan 5000 with the sf-210 auto slide
feeder? i'd hate to think that my new $1,500 batch scanner needs to be
baby sat. and a decent number of the 10,000 slides would fit squarely
in that 30-40 year old range too...

eb

 

[(Pete Cresswell)]

RE/

eek. is your nikon the super coolscan 5000 with the sf-210 auto slide
feeder? i'd hate to think that my new $1,500 batch scanner needs to be
baby sat. and a decent number of the 10,000 slides would fit squarely
in that 30-40 year old range too...

No, it's a 4000 and the feeder says "SF-200(S)" on it....so maybe they've gotten
their act together for the SF-210.

If not, one consolation: If you spend a lot of time at the 'puter it's fairly
unintrusive to just hand feed them while doing other things. After the first
hundred or so, you hardly know you're doing it....sort of like tying your
shoelaces. That's how I did a thousand or so of mine - it was just less
hassle than constantly clearing feeder jams.

 

[ThomasH]

eek. is your nikon the super coolscan 5000 with the sf-210 auto slide
feeder? i'd hate to think that my new $1,500 batch scanner needs to be
baby sat. and a decent number of the 10,000 slides would fit squarely
in that 30-40 year old range too...

eb

Both SF200 and SF210 have the same properties, except that SF210
has an adjustable to the transport from the input tray, whereas
in SF200 we used the "credit card and paper clip" trick to
prevent jams.

In both cases you will have to:

1) Unload your slides from the tray,
2) Rotate vertical images to horizontal position
3) Load the pile of slides into sf200
4) Take the pile of slides from the exit tray
5) Reorder them, as *they are in opposite order now!!*
6) Rotate vertical images again and load back into the tray.

Note that you can remove some slides from output tray and load
more into the input tray while a slide is being processed. This
way you has de facto an "endless scan" mode, not really limitted
to "max 50."


The Reflekta model showed here by Ralf is probably virtually the
same model which you can also get from Braun or Pacific Image.

http://www.braun-phototechnik.de/E/Products/scanner/scanner.htm
http://www.scanace.com/en/product/ps3600.php

As far I know, the scanner was made in cooperation between these
both companies. Braun provided slide tray advance mechanics,
Pacific Image the scanning module.

This scanner takes trays and scans an entire 36x36mm area, thus
no slide rotation is necessary.

Regardless this convenience, the question which remains is the
of image quality! It is not easy to match the LS4000/LS5000!
This is truly a superb scanner.

Thomas

 

[Dierk Haasis]

The Reflekta model showed here by Ralf is probably virtually the
same model which you can also get from Braun or Pacific Image.

Totally forgot about the Braun take (it *is* a Braun projector used as
basis). I remember having read somewhere that the image quality isn't
too good, not bad but, well, mediocre.

Old glass-mounts - the ones where you glue together two pieces of
glass with a black and white paper frame holding the photo in-between
- can be a problem with those projectors. The transport mechanism
tends to jam when going inside the light chamber if the corners are
too sharp. Sometimes they jam while being transported out of the light
chamber when the paper around the edges is slightly bulking (because
the glue doesn't hold too good).

These glass-mounts were very popular, they actually were the
top-of-the-line mounts, in the 50s and 60s in Germany. I had to scan
some from the early 80s even.

Kodak cardboard mounts (Kodachrome came in them) could also be a
problem because they are relatively light and very thin.

Otherwise the Braun Paximat projectors are very good, and if the
optics in the scanner version is from them you get quite good
hardware.

 

[Ole-Hjalmar Kristensen]

DH> Business-wise these $ 1,000 are a very good investment in your case,
DH> particularly if you are paid good money as you suggest.

DH> The first thing I thought when I read the subject line was, "Go, get
DH> em on Kodak PhotoCD [not PictureCD!]". I don't know what the cost at
DH> the moment is for one CD with a 100 scans but it may pay. Another idea
DH> was to get them to a lab and let them scan with a drum scanner, but I
DH> guess that won't pay, otherwise your customer would have come up with
DH> that. It depends on a simple equation - subtract your cost from what
DH> you get. Does it leave enough?

DH> If this is the only time you will have to work on such a big job, drum
DH> scanners are out. That leaves - besides the Nikon - any half-decent
DH> flatbed scanner with a transparency/film holder covering the complete
DH> scan area (about 12-20 pics?!). The only ones I know that can do that
DH> are about 3-10x more expensive than the Nikon.

DH> --

DH> Dierk

The Canon 9950F or the Epson 4870 could probably do it, but it would
be slow. Maybe renting or buying (and selling) an A3 flatbed scanner
with suitable properties would be an idea. I think you would be able
to scan up to 70 slides in one batch on those scanners. Creo Scitex
Eversmart, Fuji Lanovia or the Agfa or Screen equivalents comes to
mind, but it would probably be overkill. On the other hand, if you are
good at bargaining, you might actually wind up by very little net cost
by buying a used one, using it, and then selling it again.

 

[prep]

i have just- very tentatively- agreed to a job that will require me
to scan over 10,000 color slides the sole purpose of which is to be
....

so i guess what i'm asking is: is there a lower cost solution film
scanner for scanning a very LARGE number of slides for display on a
HDTV?

Low cost? It will cost you several large fortunes in wasted time and
agrivation.

One of the Kodak lab scanners can be fitted with a bulk slide feeder
I believe. The scanner is not very impressive for resolution etc, but
it does take 400' of neg at a load! Sorry I can't remember the model
number.

--
Paul Repacholi 1 Crescent Rd.,
+61 (08) 9257-1001 Kalamunda.
West Australia 6076
comp.os.vms,- The Older, Grumpier Slashdot
Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.
EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be.

 

[John DuBois]

i have just- very tentatively- agreed to a job that will require me to
scan over 10,000 color slides the sole purpose of which is to be
displayed, in what seems to me to be an interminable number of slide
shows, on a television set; more specifically a 50some inch plasma
television set (of an as yet undetermined resolution, but for the sake
of arguement, lets say it is 1080i which, as i understand it, would
mean that each image will need to be 1920x1080). ....
i've been perusing the group and various scanner review sites and the
scanner that has caught my eye is the Nikon Super Coolscan 5000,
primarily for the ability to batch scan 50 slides at a time. but it is
well over $1,000USD and it seems overkill to spend a thousand dollars
simply for batch scanning capabilities when i'll be scanning the slides
at a relatively low resolution.

so i guess what i'm asking is: is there a lower cost solution film
scanner for scanning a very LARGE number of slides for display on a
HDTV?

You could pick up a used LS2000 and SF200 for a fraction of the price of a new
LS5000+SF210. As a datapoint, I bought a used LS2000 & SF200 on eBay a few
years ago for a non-eBay-savvy friend. They were exactly as described and he's
quite happy with them.

I'm 2000 slides into an 11000 slide scanning project, initially using the
friend's equipment, then an LS4000+SF200, and now an LS5000 with the same
SF200. Even *with* the autofeeder it's slow going; I can't imagine doing this
without it! (Most of the images: http://www.armory.com/~images/ )

John