Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/01/29
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]One other option you didn't mention, and dependent upon whether you are shooting a lot of color neg or B&W film, is using a flatbed scanner to scan prints. You can get a pretty decent unit for $100-200, possibly even bundled with Photoshop Elements. Print scans display well on monitors. Of course if you are shooting mostly slide film, that won't work. Transparency adapters for flatbed scanners are available, but the results are nowhere near what a film scanner would provide. Another option is to take slides or negs to a film processor that will scan and burn them to CD for you. Noel Martin Howard <mvhoward@mac.com> wrote: > >The Internet is a great way to keep in touch with people. Posting >photographs on the Internet doubly so. However, at the moment, I find >myself with lots of friends, but no way of getting photographs onto the >Internet. If money were no issue, then it wouldn't be a problem, but >one of the things that makes life so fun and challenging is that money >is always an issue... ;) > >Right now, I have no digital camera, nor any scanner. I'm trying to >decide what I should do about this, and I'd like to hear how you have >addressed the same issues. At the moment, my options appear to be >these: > >A) Get a "cheap" digital camera. Since I'll pretty much only be using >it for web stuff, I could get away with buying something like a >point-and-shoot. The high-end ones, like the PowerShot G3, seems like >an interesting alternative that has the advantage that you could do >more serious things with it too. Major disadvantage is that it's going >to be obsolete pretty damn quickly (18 months? 24 months?) > >B) Get a "prosumer" digital camea. This means something like a Nikon >D-100 or Canon D-60. Interchangable lens SLR that would also work with >35mm film bodies. Advantages include better quality, more versitile >equipment, and will become obsolete less quickly (since I can use >lenses on several bodies). Lots of fun with new toys. Major >disadvantage is, of course, cost. Figure on $2,000 for the body, plus >lenses. > >C) Get a film scanner. I pretty much am never going to make digital >prints -- I use my Leica's and Bessa's for that. I prefer shooting >with them (small, useful, lots of lenses, accessories, etc). So, I was >thinking that maybe I should just shoot film and get a reasonably >decent scanner instead. All the advantages of doing my own >development, along with not having to buy a new camera outfit. But >what about cost? I'd not want to spend much more than about $800 on a >scanner (since it'd have the same lifetime disadvantages as a >point-and-shoot digital). Can you get decent quality for that? > >Any thoughts? What did *you* do? A, B, or C? > >(And for our Swedish audience, the answer: "På A svarar vi nej, på B >svarar vi D-100, och på C vet vi inte" is not considered an acceptable >answer... ;) > >M. > >-- >To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html > __________________________________________________________________ The NEW Netscape 7.0 browser is now available. Upgrade now! http://channels.netscape.com/ns/browsers/download.jsp Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Mail account today at http://webmail.netscape.com/ - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html