Converting film to digital

[Greg McCary]

I paid for my first P&S camera by selling on e-bay. My frustration about selling on e-bay with a P&S was with close up pictures of labels and details of the items, scratches and things. The P&S just didn't get the job done. My problem with film was the wasted film and turn around time to getting the item on e-bay and seeing if my pictures turned out. Also getting film scanned is getting more difficult, our local K-mart has closed down it's one hour service. You can still get your pictures developed but they have to be sent off to Kodak. This is a growing trend I fear. You might consider a DSLR. The prices of them seemed to have dropped lately and if you get the right set up, you will be able to take a picture of anything with instant results. Don't get me wrong I still use film and love it, but getting quality scans is getting harder by the day, Just my 2 cents. By the way a friend of mine loaned me his AE-1 to use for awhile and it's one sweet camera.
Greg

[another view]

Guess I got a little carried away with my first post...

You can get excellent results with both film and digital capture. I suggested digital because the learning curve for scanning to get really good results is a long one, and even after you get there (or to where I'm at which isn't necessarily there) it takes some time. Flatbeds take up a lot of desk space if that's a concern. I've seen plenty of bad pictures on ebay that look like they weren't good to start out, and after scanning they just look worse. This is on fairly expensive items too. Those sellers are losing bidders because of it so the auctions close at lower prices. For the buyer it's a gamble because you don't know exactly what you're getting (how can you tell if it's in excellent condition if the pictures are blurry and distorted?).

Working with a digital P&S is still photography so all the same rules apply - tripods help, on-camera flash is usually not the best option, etc. I'm not anti-film and it is possible to get good results with either. I personally find it easier with digital, that's all.

[Loupey]

A lot of great advice here already but I'll throw in my 2 pennies...

A good lab is hard to find these days (just about all the good one's in my neighborhood are gone) and the large chains handle large volumes so the quality will most likely suffer. "If you want it done right, do it yourself" has always been my photographic philosophy.

So you have 2 options as others have stated already: 1) buy a scanner or 2) buy a digital camera. Both can be around the same cost but depending on how far you want to take this will determine your decision.

I used to do primarily industrial photography (machinery, factories, etc.) and I used medium format. When I needed quick digital files for pamphlets, brochures, web images, etc., I would just have an 8" x 10" printed and scan it on a flat bed. Worked good - although the digital version was a 2nd generation copy - but tedius. I also have a 35mm film scanner - works good too but still tedius. So for low volume work, I would suggest a scanner (either type) but only if you love film.

I went digital about 4 years ago and it immediately removed 3 steps (getting the film processed, getting the specific enlargements made, and scanning the enlargement) and 4~5 days. Haven't shot much film since.

Oh, I'm glad that you like your A-1. That was my first SLR - brings back good memories