[rollei_list] Re: OT: 35mm Slides from Digital Images
- From: CarlosMFreaza <cmfreaza@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 07:34:14 -0300
Another way to obtain 35mm slides from digital files is to obtain a
high quality print from the file and to take photographs about it as
for any document reproduction.
You need a print size enough to full fill the camera frame according
the distance and the lens you will use for the task (or to adapt
distance and lens to the print size would be the second option).
In general, talking about pictures without text, a 30cmx45cm print
will allow you to work with a 50mm lens from about 0.90m to 1m, it's
better to work with a standard lens or a short tele avoiding the lens
minimal focusing distance; BTW prime lenses are better than zooms for
this work. You need to work camera on tripod assuring a perfect
parallelism between camera and print focusing the lens on the priint
central area, illumination must be even avoiding reflections on the
print.
If letters and words are significant for your images, you need to
assure they will be readable according your projected image size and
the distance they will be seen; it sounds a bit more complicated than
in practice.
At least I'd try taking the images myself watching the results before
to send the digital files to the lab. Your economical convenience
varies according the number of digital images you need to convert into
35mm slides of course. A Kodak 100 Elitechrome 36 exposures costs
about $6.50 and process including slide mounting about $8.50. A
professional service to convert your digital files into slides will
cost from 2 to $4 per slide and you have and additional cost for the
mail post. BTW you also need to add the digital print cost if you take
the photographs, but if you already have a good printer and good
photographic paper...
Carlos
2009/10/13 Elias Roustom <eroustom@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
> Old article indeed - old site too, but useful.
>
> That explains some of it - I wonder if the CRTs are much improved. Current
> sites don't seem to ask for such large files.
> I don't know if my 12MB 4/3 digital files even make such large tiffs.
>
> Thanks,
>
> E.
>
> On Oct 12, 2009, at 6:09 PM, Eric Goldstein wrote:
>
>> Hi Elias -
>>
>> The film recorder is the hardware which "projects" the image for
>> shooting... it is a very high grade proprietary CRT mated to a film
>> camera. The resolution of the projection system is matched to the film
>> format used for output. Here's an explanation of the math:
>>
>> http://www.modernimaging.com/film_recorders.htm
>>
>> It's an old article and modern recorders are capable of significantly
>> higher resolution, though in truth few projection applications require
>> it.
>>
>> While it is true that MF projection may have an edge over high-end
>> digital projection in terms of resolution, it is much for expensive,
>> much less reliable, and does not provide the production options of
>> digital projection technology. I have not seen a commercial or
>> corporate projected conference presentation with film in years... the
>> industry has moved to digital to match customer demands.
>>
>> If you ever have the chance to attend an NSA or ISU conferences, you
>> will see stereo digital and film projection (very demanding
>> applications) in 35 mm and MF. You can judge for yourself the current
>> state of the art for each medium; these folks have been moving more
>> and more to digital projection for the reasons we've been discussing.
>>
>>
>> Eric Goldstein
>>
>> --
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 5:49 PM, <eroustom@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> From what I've read - it seems that the way the digital file is
>>> transferred to slides is by projecting the digital image onto a roll of
>>> slide film and then processing it (E6). So what you have is a slide to
>>> project that is itself a 600x900 pixel image. 900 pixels over 36mm is 25
>>> pixels per 1mm (pretty good) which projected to 1 meter wide (in my
>>> classroom) would spread those 25 pixels across 40mm, and from 2-3 meters
>>> away, nobody is going to see them. I suppose that enlarging it to something
>>> like 2 meters wide you would see it. Some of the services offer higher
>>> resolution output for around $4 a slide... at that price I'll reshoot. But
>>> at $2 a slide for what I was missing from my lecture, 600x900 will do just
>>> fine.
>>> Thanks Mark and Eric for sharing your confidence with the process.
>>> John, I'm surprised that your scan did so poorly when projected
>>> digitally. I had a friend give a lecture to my class last fall, and he
>>> hooked up his laptop to the department's projector and what we saw looked
>>> pretty good to me. I probably didn't notice the pixels so much, as it was a
>>> typography lecture, and I'm used to seeing type on screen. All his images
>>> were either scans of flat art (b&w line art) or point-and-shoot digital
>>> captures from his notebooks.
>>> Elias
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "John Wild" <jwild@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> To: "rollei list" <rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 3:58:15 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
>>> Subject: [rollei_list] Re: OT: 35mm Slides from Digital Images
>>>
>>> A 'real' slide show, especially with 6x6 transparencies is way, way
>>> better
>>> than a digital projector can produce.
>>>
>>> I did a comparison with a 6x6 transparency and a scanned file of that
>>> transparency, both projected side by side to about 4 feet square. The
>>> digital projector image was pixelated and the colours and contrast range
>>> were not a patch on the slide. The Digital image was brighter though.
>>>
>>> Digital projectors only have limited resolution on similar to a computer
>>> monitor resolution, ie VGA, SVGA, EGA etc so it does not matter how fine
>>> the
>>> resolution of the digital file is, the projectors cannot display that
>>> amount
>>> of detail.
>>>
>>> Printing a digital file to produce a transparency may be a better option
>>> but
>>> again the resolution of the printer used to produce the image will have a
>>> bearing on the maximum projected size when compared to a film
>>> transparency.
>>> You may get better results by printing the digital file onto paper and
>>> photographing the paper onto transparency film.
>>>
>>> John
>>>
>>>
>>> On 11/10/2009 15:46, "Robert Meier" <robertmeier@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>>> My experience is the opposite: slides in a slide projector give a
>>>> brighter, sharper, and more colorful image than digital projectors
>>>> give. By far.
>>>>
>>>> On Oct 11, 2009, at 8:48 AM, Elias Roustom wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> This is OT for sure, but there's some very experienced pros on this
>>>>> list.
>>>>> I gave a slide presentation to my class the other day, and was
>>>>> sorry I wasn't able to include some digital shots.
>>>>> (I should have kept up the strict analog regimen) Has anyone ever
>>>>> made slides from digital files? Any advise, or warnings?
>>>>> I know digital projection is supposed to be superior in every way,
>>>>> but my slide projector is bought and paid for, and even if I borrow
>>>>> a projector from the department I don't have a laptop to work from,
>>>>> and I doubt the iPod route is good enough.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>> Elias
>>>>>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> Rollei List
>>>>>
>>>
>>> ---
>>> Rollei List
>>>
>>> - Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>
>>> - Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
>>> in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>>>
>>> - Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
>>> 'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>>>
>>> - Online, searchable archives are available at
>>> //www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
>>>
>> ---
>> Rollei List
>>
>> - Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>> - Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
>> in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>>
>> - Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
>> 'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>>
>> - Online, searchable archives are available at
>> //www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
>>
>
> ---
> Rollei List
>
> - Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> - Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'in the
> subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>
> - Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with'unsubscribe' in the
> subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>
> - Online, searchable archives are available at
> //www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
>
>
---
Rollei List
- Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Online, searchable archives are available at
//www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
Other related posts:
