jonoslack
Active member
Hi Simon
I did this two years ago.
I bought an M6ttl and a Nikon 5000 scanner, and, for a month, I shot nothing but film (40 or 50 rolls).
I had them developed in a local lab (excellent and fast) and then scanned them myself.
I enjoyed the kit, the nostalgia and the 'feel' of the results . . . but there it ended, I usually had to do more PP to get what I wanted from the scans, so the actual workload was more than doubled, the scanning was an absolute pain in the ***, slow and needing constant intervention.
I still do some scanning, as I'm gradually digitising my old film negatives, and the conclusion I came to is that you can either do it 'well enough', or you can do it 'properly'. Properly means wet scanning, and it's doubtful if the Nikon's are good enough for that. 'well enough' means an Epson V700 or V750 - these are actually quite a pleasure to use, and you can get pretty good scans in a fraction of the time taken with the Nikon Scanner.
As for the results - well, 2 years ago, there was a definite feel to film which was really difficult to duplicate. These days, with tools like Silver efex pro even that isn't really true (before anyone jumps in, I'm not saying that the results are the same - but there is definitely a rule of diminishing returns going on).
To sum it up. If you have lots of time on your hands, and you're willing to go at it full tilt, then fine. If you haven't . . . . then stick with digital. If you DO decide to go with film . . . . I'd get an Epson V series scanner FIRST, and then get the very few shots where it isn't good enough scanned by a pro.
I did this two years ago.
I bought an M6ttl and a Nikon 5000 scanner, and, for a month, I shot nothing but film (40 or 50 rolls).
I had them developed in a local lab (excellent and fast) and then scanned them myself.
I enjoyed the kit, the nostalgia and the 'feel' of the results . . . but there it ended, I usually had to do more PP to get what I wanted from the scans, so the actual workload was more than doubled, the scanning was an absolute pain in the ***, slow and needing constant intervention.
I still do some scanning, as I'm gradually digitising my old film negatives, and the conclusion I came to is that you can either do it 'well enough', or you can do it 'properly'. Properly means wet scanning, and it's doubtful if the Nikon's are good enough for that. 'well enough' means an Epson V700 or V750 - these are actually quite a pleasure to use, and you can get pretty good scans in a fraction of the time taken with the Nikon Scanner.
As for the results - well, 2 years ago, there was a definite feel to film which was really difficult to duplicate. These days, with tools like Silver efex pro even that isn't really true (before anyone jumps in, I'm not saying that the results are the same - but there is definitely a rule of diminishing returns going on).
To sum it up. If you have lots of time on your hands, and you're willing to go at it full tilt, then fine. If you haven't . . . . then stick with digital. If you DO decide to go with film . . . . I'd get an Epson V series scanner FIRST, and then get the very few shots where it isn't good enough scanned by a pro.