I've spent most of the afternoon putting together this old Kodak slide projector and going through box after box of slides my mom and dad had. It's been pretty cool. Found some good pics of my dad's entire family (his dad died before I came around), it's neat seeing all the old cars, how people dressed, etc. etc. I can't help but notice the carefree, happy expressions Mom and Dad have that aren't in the pics post 1967 and 1969.

Anyway, I'm just projecting them straight onto my living room wall....which is taupe or beige or some sort of brownish color. What it isn't is white. Which is why I'm surprised when I take a cell phone pic to post some of them on Facebook....



That's my mom's family BTW.

How in the hell are they coming out like this?? LOL

Another thought.....kinda funny that back in 1965 or so, my dad took a pic that he could not see how it'd turn out. After the day or trip or whatever, he dropped the film off where presumably it'd be mailed to a lab and sent back what...maybe a week or so at best?? Then he'd either get it in the mail or get a phone call to come get his slides. THEN he would tell Mom "Hey, let's have the Smiths over to show the slides" or whatever. So to share the pics with a very select, small group (who could not get a copy of that cool landscape he took without borrowing the negative and going through that same grind) would take weeks.....and I, with the push of a few buttons, have given a copy to hundreds, if not thousands, worldwide in an instant.

Crazy...

something else that might "blow the mind" is the image quality produced by today's cell phones. My first cell phone with a camera only did 1200 x 1600 pixles and the "lens" that was used to sort of focus the image on the sensor may have been a bit of glass from an antique glass Coca Cola bottle.

However even though you have found a somewhat workable solution I have to tell you that using an actual film scanner on your old negatives and slides will produce a much more detailed image providing a decent camera was used to take the picture. BTW, slide shooters typically chose higher quality cameras and lenses than those just shooting with Kodacolor. So, if you are looking at actual slides odds are good they were taken with a camera capable of producing high quality images.

Note, if you fine you are interested in picking up a film scanner the best "bang for buck" today would be an Epson scanner with a transparency unit such as the 200 dollar or so V600 scanner.

Downside to doing this is that scanning can be a rather slow process. I recently picked up the much more expensive model V800 because it will scan my 4x5 inch negatives and if I ever wish to try shooting with an 8x10 inch camera it's also able to scan 8x10 negatives or transparencies. At 4800 DPI scanning 12 35mm negatives take about 12-15 minutes.

Note, I suspect that we may be seeing the last remnants of the Film Scanner market niche. Because Nikon and Canon have stopped building film scanners. That more than anything drove me to get my V800. Because I fully intend on to keep shooting with my 4x5 camera and use scanning as my digital "darkroom". As for why, Tilts, Swings, and Shifts. Something not available in Digital unless you have 20-50K to spend on a large format digital camera. Plus I like shooting with real B&W film.

Oh, I was just doing it for expedience. I will probably have a few scanned/printed/whatever, the vast majority will get sent to my brother along with the projector. I have no idea what camera my dad used, to be honest.

Thanks for your comments, Scooter123. I have long been considering a high quality scanner for the many old transparencies I have that I would like to preserve and make better use of.

How does something like the V800 work when scanning a 35mm slide? Just lay it on the bed and scan like a document?

Are you saying that you are surprised that the color is coming out accurate, despite the fact that you are projecting on a taupe wall? Then, the answer is because all digital cameras have auto-white balance (AWB) adjustment.

The camera automatically adjusts the image so that the white parts of the image look natural to the eye. In your image, the gentleman's shirt is the white point and so the camera adjusts so that the shirt is white, pulling along everything else with it.

AWB works well enough that most people have no clue that it's happening. The exception is when you have two or more sources of light that have different color temperatures--incandescent light is very warm/orange, and fluorescent is very cool/blue.

quote:

Originally posted by Aeteocles:
Are you saying that you are surprised that the color is coming out accurate, despite the fact that you are projecting on a taupe wall?

Yes, exactly.

Technology is a trip.

Believe it or not, the human eye (brain) has a similar function. Basically, it assumes that the brightest item in view is white and all colors seen are adjusted to fit that definition. That is why pictures photographed under incandescent light look yellow to us, but the same scene is seen in the correct colors live.

flashguyh

Tiny Japanese Photographers inside your phone, doing it all.

Or aliumz.

Or witchcrafts.....

SigFreund, I have a Nikon 5000 slide scanner with slide feeder. However I found I get results as good and faster with a simple slide copier device on the front of a macro lens; it works best if you have a camera you can tether to a computer monitor to get the best focus and composition.

My scanner (Epson V700) came with trays for different media. I have a frame for 35mm negs, a frame for 2-1/4" negs, and a slide tray for 35mm color slides. Color correction of your monitor, scanner, and printer are key to my process. Maybe the newer equipment has better color correction controls......I'm old school!

quote:

Originally posted by Aeteocles:
-incandescent light is very warm/orange, and fluorescent is very cool/blue.

Fluorescent light is actually green-ish, in terms of color temp.
I started my photo career on film. Filtering for fluorescent light (magenta) was the bane of my existence, for years.
Auto white balance truly is a gift from God, in my eyes.☺

quote:

Originally posted by sjtill:
However I found I get results as good and faster with a simple slide copier device on the front of a macro lens; it works best if you have a camera you can tether to a computer monitor to get the best focus and composition.

Good thought. I do have a slide copier, but not a camera that can be linked directly to a computer.

I use an Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mk II (whew!) for this, and it can record directly to the computer hard drive. I then do any necessary color correction in Lightroom.
Unfortunately there is to my knowledge not an available software program that does what Nikon’s old software for their scanner did, which miraculously corrected old slides. I do use Vuescan (Hamrick.com) which has a color correction routine, but it is not as good as the Nikon, or other older and no longer available software.