Recently we were faced with the task of converting slides and negative films into digital form. And this concerned not only personal amateur materials, but also teaching aids, as well as books that, even in those distant times when there were no copiers and scanners, were re-shot on photographic film. And the film gets old every year, gets scratched, breaks, and becomes unusable.

We looked at how much the Nikon ES-E28 proprietary slide adapter for a digital camera costs and wondered whether the game was worth the candle, since after the work was done there would be no need for this accessory. Of course, you can use a scanner for this, but with large quantities of slides and roll film, the scanning process becomes difficult. And it was decided to make an adapter from improvised materials.

We used the domestic Diascope-2 "Leningrad" as a slide holder, having previously removed the eyepiece part from it completely.

To make the image more contrasty (the white plastic of the diascope transmits light very well), we painted it with black nitro enamel.

Since Talbot (1835) and the advent of the two-stage negative-positive process, the photographer's work has inevitably involved copying. Film has also been around for a very long time. Its creation is associated with the works of Goodwin (1887) and Eastman (1888), the priority dispute between them ended with Goodwin receiving a patent for film in 1898.

Cinema gave impetus to the development of copying for the purpose of replicating products so that they could be viewed maximum number spectators.

In the beginning, the main method was contact copying. However, the need to change the scale of the copy compared to the original led to the emergence of in various ways optical copying using a machine or a device specially invented by photographers called an enlarger.

The appearance of circulating materials also did not remove the issue of copying from the agenda, since the photographer had a need to create copies of his works for distribution.

An additional, although not decisive, impetus for the development of optical copying was the appearance of raster autochrome plates developed in 1907 by the Lumière brothers, which due to their nature (gelatin droplets randomly located on the plate, colored in primary colors) do not allow contact copying, since it is impossible to achieve a match dots of the same color on the plates from which they are copied. (In fact, to be fair, it is worth adding that the first linear raster was patented in 1892 by J. Jolly).

I note that contact copying still remained the main method for a very long time and, from my point of view, played a significant role in the emergence and spread of multilayer color emulsions, which almost completely replaced raster emulsions in the middle of the last century.

In the digital era, the issue of copying was finally finally resolved - the copy is indistinguishable from the original, but the issue of continuity remained open, i.e. digitization of images. There is no need to talk about identity here; one can only talk about the sufficiency or redundancy of information.

The digitization process itself is also very old, since it dates back to phototelegraph devices. Modern drum scanners are practically no different from the first phototelegraph devices and successfully cope with the task assigned to them. The advent of mass-produced, relatively cheap digital SLR cameras gives the photographer the opportunity not to buy a scanner to digitize his own archive, but to try to retake it using his existing camera. This solution has clear advantages. Firstly, there is no need to spend money on a unit that is comparable in cost, or even significantly superior, to a digital camera. Secondly, it does not require the acquisition of special skills, since reshooting is inherently closer to the usual work of a photographer than scanning. You can work with film of any format. Unlike a scanner, there is no resolution limit: it is always possible, even if only a fragment, to be re-shot with such magnification that all the information contained on the film will be digitized. The scanner photographs only one line at a time; similarly, using the device, you can re-shoot it in parts - “scan” any frame. There is no problem with very tight frames - flash or long exposure allows you to pull out everything that was on the film without any problems. And finally, the archives of many photographers are so large that a lifetime is not enough to scan them well. And the reshoot process can be quite quick. In principle, cameras with fixed optics can also be used for reshoots, but they are no longer a real competitor to the scanner, but a solution of the “fish for lack of fish and cancer” type solution. For information on how to make cameras with non-replaceable lenses work with settings similar to those described in this material, see the article Kepler tube - a macro converter and a photo gun in one bottle.

Over more than 100 years of continuous copying, photographers have come up with a lot of devices to make this process comfortable. It is clear that the contact copying process cannot in any way be applied to the digitization of images.

Reshoot Settings

Devices can be divided into two main groups: 1:1 reshoot units and photo enlargers. The photograph below shows a classic design consisting of a Zenit apparatus, a PZF macro photography attachment, a Helios-44 lens and a PD diarrhesis attachment.

The diareproduction attachment PD is designed for attaching 35 mm film or transparencies within a 50x50 mm frame, attached to the movable rail PZF. The original is equipped with frosted glass, but it has such a large frosting that with a strong aperture its grain becomes noticeable in the copy. Therefore, in the above photo it is dismantled. It is proposed to use milk as a diffuser, frosted glass or even a sheet of paper, but located far enough from the film so that even with maximum depth of field, the structure and heterogeneity of the diffuser does not appear in the picture.

If you have a digital camera with a matrix size that matches the frame size of 24x36 mm, like Canon EOS 5D, Canon EOS 1Ds, then it is enough to purchase an M42-EOS adapter ring and install a digital camera instead of Zenit. However, cameras with matrices close to 15x22 mm in size are widespread and relatively cheap, such as Canon EOS D30, D60, 10D, 20D, 300D, 350D, Pentax *ist D, KONICA MINOLTA DYNAX 7D and 5D, Nikon D50, D70, D100, Sigma SD9 and 10. These cameras, if installed in place of the Zenit, will only allow retaking central part frames or frames of smaller formats, including very small ones, which I wrote about in an article dedicated to Minox cameras. If you need to reshoot a 24x36 frame on a 15x22 mm matrix, then problems arise. When shooting 1:1, the optical design is a symmetrical design, in which the distance from the object to the lens and from the lens to the matrix is ​​equal to two focal lengths. The focal length of the Helios-44 lens is 58 mm, and the minimum distance between the lens and the film, which can be obtained using a CCD attachment, is 90 mm. This is not enough for the frame image to fit completely on the matrix. Accordingly, there are two ways to obtain the desired scale. Either use a lens with a long focal length, for example, Industar 100, or modify the attachment to move the lens closer to the camera.

The larger focal length of the lens allows you to position it at the desired distance from the device. However, the length of the rails is not enough to position the object at the required distance. In the photograph shown, the rail has been lengthened through the use of another PZF attachment. Those. The PD is attached to the rail of the second attachment, and the Industar 100 lens through adapter rings is link between two consoles. The bellows of the second attachment can be used as a sliding hood.

Another option is to recess the lens inside the bellows and thus reduce the distance between it and the device. More details on how to do this are described in the article "On trying to get the most out of your optical system." The main disadvantage of this design is the rather inconvenient process of changing the aperture.

You can cut off part of the fur, but it will be possible to move it a centimeter closer to the device. This modification of the bellows is irreversible, it will allow you to shoot at a smaller scale, but will reduce the maximum magnification, since the length of the bellows after cutting is not enough to stretch the entire length of the rails.

In general, the design turned out to be quite successful, and one of its additional benefits is the ability to use an automatic matched flash installed directly on the device, without additional connecting cables. In this case, the installation is located in front of a white reflective screen located approximately half a meter from the set-top box; using the preliminary flash, the camera evaluates the required pulse power to obtain a correctly exposed frame.

However, films come not only in 35 mm, but also in even larger sizes, for example, 6x6; 6x4.5. In this case it is worth using technical solutions, embedded in a standard enlarger designed for printing photographs from both wide film and 35mm film. Fortunately, in the past, photographic equipment made by a variety of companies had many common standards. Therefore, I managed to create several installations based on the Polish Crocus enlarger, Pentacon bellows for macro photography and the PZF attachment.

The picture shows a system that combines the extension of the PENTACON and PZF bellows located between the camera and the lens, which allows you to obtain the maximum magnification possible for a given installation.

Overall, it's a good setup, but the magnifier lens movement mechanism is too flimsy to move not just one lens, but the entire bulk towering above it.

Installations with independent film frame fastening. The lens moves along powerful rails, previously designed to move the enlarger's lighting head. The picture shows a system with two bellows, similar to the one described earlier.

The picture shows the simplest, and therefore rigid, design, which I eventually settled on. PENTACON bellows do not have smooth tension adjustment, so focusing is achieved only by moving the device with the lens relative to the object. Rough movement is carried out along the enlarger rail, while fine movement is carried out by a slide coupled with PENTACON bellows. The enlarger bellows are used as an additional hood that protects against glare that can be created by room lighting. Dust is the eternal enemy of the photographer; one of the ways to combat it is with a miniature vacuum cleaner, which in the photograph stands on the board of the enlarger.

Mounting Nikon cameras in this case does not create problems. A 2.5 mm larger working distance does not affect the weather during macro photography. Any M42-Nikon adapter is suitable since you do not need to focus at infinity, and you are not using a camera lens with a working distance of 45 mm, but a long-focus (110 mm) lens from an Industar 100 enlarger.

The Jolos attachment is clearly visible in the picture; it can be rotated both relative to the lens and the camera relative to it. By rotating the attachment at a 45-degree angle, you can easily focus on any of the four corners. If stitching a picture from several frames is not intended, the question of what is better, moving the camera in the focal plane or the lens together with the camera relative to the frame, remains open. In this case, a lens designed to work with wide films is used. Therefore, there is no noticeable difference between these options. If you are using a lens designed for 35 mm film, it makes sense to place the attachment in front of the lens and simultaneously move the lens and camera relative to the frame.

Shooting

Remote control and camera settings

When reshooting as a remote control remote control It's worth using a computer. This solution, like any cable, allows you not to shake the setup when shooting and almost immediately see the result on a large computer screen. The latter is very important because it allows you to immediately correct errors that are easy to miss when looking at the image on the camera screen. If the camera is connected to the computer via USB 1 (Canon D60), then for a 6 MP file transfer to RAW takes 53 s, and to JPEG - 20 s, if via USB 2 (Nikon D50) - then 6 and 4 s, respectively. For remote control of older Canon cameras, you can use the Remote Capture program, and for the latest models, EOS Capture.

Nikon cameras are controlled using the Nikon Capture program.

The Nikon D50 camera description states that "Nikon Capture 4 software version 4.3 or later (sold separately) can be used to control the camera from a computer." Only a 30-day demo version is included with the camera. However, this gift will not allow you to evaluate the capabilities of remote control of the camera, since the kit that I had for testing contains version 4.2, which really does not see this camera. With the Internet, the problem is easily solved, but the residue remains. The program allows you not only to take pictures, but also to change the shutter speed, file recording format, etc. In addition, service information that is visible in the camera viewfinder is displayed on the screen. Together with fast data transfer via USB 2, this somewhat brightens up the inability to work in aperture priority mode with lenses without a microprocessor.

If you shoot single frames, it is better to use RAW. If the task is to convert the archive into digital form as quickly as possible or you plan to stitch together a frame from several photographs, then it may be worth shooting in JPEG, having previously configured the camera. It is worth reducing the contrast and choosing the right white balance, because in this case it depends not only on the lamp, but also on the film that you are re-shooting. When gluing together several frames, you should not rely on automation, because it can evaluate individual fragments differently. This applies not only to camera automation, but also to automatic RAW conversion.

Stitching an image from several shots

If you move the device relative to the lens, then there are no additional distortions that need to be corrected during gluing. The Jolos prefix, described in detail in our articles (see, and ), allows you to do this. Stitching can be done without any problems in any graphic editor. You can also use specialized programs for stitching panoramas. In this case, in the menu you should select - stitching an image scanned in parts. For example, what it looks like in the PhotoStitch program supplied with Canon cameras is shown in the picture.

In the separately purchased The Panorama Factory program it looks like this:

You can also use freely distributed (open source) programs based on the package created by Professor Helmut Dersch.
There are many shells that work with this code, which allow you to prepare images for stitching in a comfortable graphical mode, but most of them do not have a comprehensive parameter for stitching undistorted images and you will have to put zeros in the columns responsible for correcting distortion and other distortions.

My version of the PhotoStich program worked quite correctly in manual mode and allowed me to stitch together both linear and mosaic panoramas. Its disadvantages include the inability to work with 16-bit files, i.e. if you shoot in RAW, then the correction must be carried out before stitching, which requires increased care so that it does not turn out that different frames of the same panorama were unnecessarily processed using completely different algorithms. In this case, problems may arise with transitions in brightness and color between adjacent frames. The Panorama Factory program allows you to work with 16-bit files, but only with linear panoramas. Programs based on Panorama Tools can do anything if you can learn how to use them. By the way, they allow you to work on a computer with any operating system.

Debriefing

Reshoot results

Using the example of a 4.5 x 6 cm image taken on Kodak E100SW film with a Zenza BRONICA ETR Si camera with a Zenzanon PE 2.8/75 lens, we will try to figure out how small a fragment of the image can be captured and whether it is worth shooting. Those. the age-old question of recent times: how many pixels are there in film? Rectangles corresponding to subsequent enlargements of this frame are marked on the image.

Full frame shot

Thumbnail of the entire frame. The entire frame has a size of 2048 x 3072 pixels, if taken with a 6 megapixel camera, or, if re-shot in parts, taking 3 pictures, then 2941 x 4357.

Fragments 1:1
The photo contains the entire frame	The frame is stitched from 3 photographs

First increase
The image contains a fragment of the original frame. Linear dimensions in pixels are increased by 2.3 times compared to a photograph containing the entire frame.
Thumbnail of the entire photo.

Fragment 1:1

To control the maximum capabilities, a photograph is shown with the same magnification on Mikrat 200 film, which has significantly more a high resolution and allows you to quantify the quality of shooting by counting the rings of the globes.

In this case, 5 black rings are visible.

Second increase
The linear dimensions in pixels are increased by 4.1 times compared to an image containing the entire frame.

Fragment 1:1

In this case, 7 black rings are visible.

Increase third
(10x)

Fragment 1:1

In this case, 9 black rings are visible. The latter are more likely to be guessed.

This is where the possibilities for increasing our installation ended. Even larger images of the world can be taken under a microscope using the setup described in the article “On the history of the creation of cameras, standards and homemade cameras.”

Thumbnail of an image under a microscope. 9 rings are visible.

Grain is very distracting. If we look at the 1:1 photo (lower fragment), the rings are even more difficult to distinguish than in the miniature. In a slightly out-of-focus or zoomed-out photo, it is easier to count the rings, although the image obviously contains less information. To integrate it with the ideal tool given to us by nature, we need to move away from the screen - then they become noticeable. Is such an increase necessary? Perhaps it is necessary if, as in Antonioni's film Blow-up, you know what you want to see. However, you may not be able to convince others that it is really depicted there.

Comparison of fragments 1 and 3, taken at different magnifications and reduced to the same size.

I will give a few more arguments that seem useful to me when calculating the required magnification when reshooting.

First you need to decide how much area the image point on the film occupies. This size will obviously depend on the nature of the image and the type of emulsion. The image is created by silver crystals. The diameter of the circle on the film when two adjacent image points are distinguishable depends on their number and size distribution. In the limiting case of a line drawing: a black dot is a single crystal of silver, a white dot is its absence. Those. it is necessary to enlarge it so that each crystal is visible. If our image contains 10 halftones, the diameter of the circle on the film must contain at least ten silver crystals, then circles containing from one to ten crystals will give us the opportunity to distinguish 10 shades of gray. In the case of an 8-bit image, we have the opportunity to register 8 2 = 256 shades, so the minimum circle on the film that is worth considering should contain 255 silver crystals. (Naturally, under the assumption that they are all the same size. In the more general case of crystals of variable size, it is necessary that the circle contains crystals with a total cross-sectional area exceeding the minimum crystal by 256 times). In the case of color multilayer film, this circle should be focused to a point with a diameter of 2 pixels on the sensor. Its area will correspond to 4 pixels, covered with 3 different filters. (There is no silver left in the colored multilayer film; it has been replaced by dye). To now get the correct image, we need to average the values ​​of 4 pixels and, using the appropriate filter, determine the color of the point as much as possible, after which the image can be reduced by 2 times without loss of information. Those. ideally, with an 8 megapixel matrix, you can reshoot a section of the frame containing 2 million of the above-described circles. Although no information is lost, it is a shame to reduce the image and is often not done; Knowing this, printers demand from everyone the notorious 300 dots per inch, twice the capabilities of most printing machines.

There is no point in reducing the resulting image if the image point image is smaller than the sensitive element of the matrix. In this case, when zoomed out, we will lose some of the points whose brightness we registered correctly. As for the color of small details, it will be averaged over two neighboring points, which in the original image with such an increase may turn out to be colored different colors. That. if in the extreme case the image contains, for example, 12 million pixels (4000 x 3000 significant points), then to save them all, you will have to take more than 8 pictures with a 6 MP camera. If we are ready to save only half of the significant points, then it is enough to take just one picture.

Reshooting archival footage

Reshooting allows you to arrange a photo session on long winter evenings and travel through space and time through your archive. Finally, a few examples assessing what to expect from older footage.

1977 Dombay, ORWO CHROM UT 18 film, Zenit E camera, Helios 44 lens. Re-shooting with a Canon D60 camera with an Industar 100 lens.

The quality is surprisingly high. A stitch of three frames is quite justified. This may be due to the fine grain of the first developer. I don’t remember how I developed this film, but at that time original ORWO film processing kits were still available. It makes sense to reduce the image to 8 megapixels after processing. The resulting image is close to ideal - i.e. to an image composed only of significant points, further removal of which will lead to a deterioration in both information content and entertainment value.

Fragments of two photographs, reduced to the same size. The top one is 70% percent of the original (the entire frame is 8 megapixels), the bottom one is 49%. As a result, you can notice that the microcontrast of the bottom image is higher, although after compression to JPEG for publication this is almost not noticeable. Those. You can re-shoot with high magnification, but this is a hunt for fleas.

1981 Shuya River, ORWO CHROM UT 18 film, Lubitel 166 camera. Re-shooting with a Canon D60 camera with an Industar 100 lens.

Miniature	Fragment

If we fit the image of the entire square frame on the matrix, we will get a picture measuring 1900 by 1900 pixels.

Miniature

Fragment

Neat Image (Naturally, a profile must be created for the film at a certain magnification. In this case, matrix noise can be neglected). I am providing a photo solely to show that working with negatives does not introduce significant complications into the work. Working with unmasked film is easier than with masked film, but in the era of mass distribution of masked films, photo labs have already appeared, and it is better to convert these frames into digital from surviving 10x15 cm prints. Prints on unmasked film, made at home, were poorly preserved, and Due to the labor-intensive nature of the process, I did not make prints from all frames. By the way, I note that takes that were initially rejected due to excessive or insufficient density and which were not worked with are often preserved better and are more suitable today for digital processing. In this case, all processing was reduced to image inversion and automatic correction.

If you stitch a picture from 6 frames, and then reduce it to the size of a picture that was taken with magnification, at which long side frame coincides with the side of the square, you can notice a slight improvement in quality. If the photo is not improved, then it clearly contains extra dots that do not add information, but create a feeling of sloppiness. Thus, we can consider that a wide photograph taken with ORWO film good lens, contains 9 megapixels, but to obtain it, you must first obtain a 16 megapixel image. Taking into account the overlap required for stitching, it turns out that to obtain a juicy image containing all the information about the object, and not about the film grain, it is necessary to shoot 6 frames with a total area of ​​36 megapixels.

1988 Portugal, ORWO CHROM UT 18 film, Kyiv 88 camera, Volna lens (F=80 mm).

Miniature (2933 x 2966)	Fragment

P.S.

So what can you expect from the archives? In most cases, you can get a frame that is not inferior in quality to a picture taken from nature with a digital 6 MP camera. Sometimes you can achieve significantly higher quality. However, this depends on so many factors - film, developer, development mode, lens, aperture, camera - that it is difficult to predict the results in advance. Pictures taken with medium format cameras are usually marginally superior in quality to 35mm and have significantly less scatter. This is due to the fact that 35 mm cameras have always strived to catch up with mass-produced medium format cameras and fulfilled their task through high-quality lenses and fine-grained film. Photographers who continued to shoot with medium format cameras, in most cases, sought to obtain stable, rather than record-breaking results, and therefore used more sensitive films, believing that required quality Due to the area of ​​the frame, they will get even with coarser grain. The exception is photographs taken with expensive medium format cameras on low-speed film at ideal conditions lighting. In most cases, when reshooting, it is advisable to take one photo with a 6 or 8 megapixel camera with cropping. An urgent need Stitching occurs if it is not clear how to crop a square frame or you want to maintain exactly that aspect ratio. In this case, two photographs are usually sufficient, although, as mentioned above, it may be necessary to take 9 or even more photographs to capture all the information contained in the film.

The enlarger is a technically very well thought out design, on the basis of which you can make a setup for reshooting using any digital SLR cameras that exist today. In reality, in this case, only the camera matrix and the viewfinder are used for manual focusing. Given enough comfortable conditions shooting, there is no fundamental difference which camera to use. Cameras with a USB2 interface provide additional convenience for working with a computer. It would probably be even more convenient to focus on a computer screen, completely abandoning the optical viewfinder. However, there are practically no commercially produced cameras today that allow this to be done. Theoretically, this is possible with Canon 20 Da and FUJIFILM FinePix S3 Pro cameras. My feelings on this issue are based on work experience

Until recently, film cameras were very popular. They were the only one in an accessible way to capture memorable moments of our lives, as they had practically no analogues. But with development modern technologies Film cameras were replaced by digital cameras, which allowed everyone to take high-quality photographs.

In addition, digital photographic equipment has a number of advantages:

• the ability to view and edit the frame immediately after shooting;
• more convenient viewfinder;
• easy transfer of digital images to any other devices;
• wide possibilities for photo post-processing, etc.

Despite all the advantages, some professional photographers still use film for their work. They believe that a digital frame is not capable of correctly conveying the color gamut of the photograph and that’s all the smallest details, objects imprinted on them.

Shot with a film camera must first be converted to a negative before it can be printed on on paper. This process quite lengthy and problematic without special equipment. In addition, when developing and printing photographs, harmful substances are used. human body substances that must be handled correctly.

Many people keep not only printed photographs, but also their negatives in their photo archives. For example, after developing the film, only those frames that, in the photographer’s opinion, turned out best were printed, and the rest were saved just in case. If you still have such negatives or, then they can be digitized using a special scanner or camera.

How to make digital photographs from slides?

There are several ways to convert slides and negatives into digital photographs:

• Using a special slide scanner.
• Using a regular scanner.

The first option is the simplest and highest quality. You need to purchase special device- a slide scanner, for example, one of these models. This equipment is quite expensive because it uses special technology eliminating defects on slides, so that the scanned frames will be of very high quality.

The operating principle of a slide scanner is very simple:

1. Insert slides or negatives into a special tray.
2. Place the tray in the niche on the scanner.
3. Install the bundled software on your computer and start the scanning process.
4. Specify whether negatives should be converted to a normal color scheme.
5. You receive high-quality photographs in digital format, which can then be easily printed on paper.

When using a conventional flatbed scanner, the quality of the images will be significantly lower, it is unable to correct frames, and the power of its lamp is sometimes not enough to illuminate the frame as much as possible.

The process of reshooting negatives and slides on a flatbed scanner:

1. Place slides or negatives on the scanner glass.
2. Place a mirror on top of the film with the reflective surface down (you can scan without it, but only some printers have a lamp that can illuminate the frame).
3. Instead of a mirror, you can try placing a frosted glass lamp over the film, which can provide even illumination of the frames during scanning.
4. Run the scan on your computer at maximum resolution.
5. You will receive photos from slides or negatives (for negatives in Photoshop you need to invert the tone curve).

To convert a negative into a regular photograph:

1. Open the scanned file in Photoshop.
2. Go to the Tone Curve tab.
3. Select a linear curve on it.
4. Drag the ends of the curve in opposite directions horizontally.
5. Go to the “White Balance” section and select with the eyedropper neutral color on the frame.
6. Now you can adjust the contrast and brightness of the photo.

Instructions

Buy any photo enlarger and any projector for slides and filmstrips. Good places There are various auctions to find such devices. Make sure that the device is in full working order before purchasing it if you do not know how to fix them yourself. In the second case, strictly follow safety precautions. Remember that these appliances are designed to be turned off periodically for cooling purposes.

Please note that photographic films shot with standard 35mm have frames located parallel to the perforation, while on filmstrips and transparencies they are perpendicular to it, and at the same time they are slightly smaller in size. Therefore, the former can only be projected with an enlarger, and the latter only with a projector.

Mount on a tripod. To prevent the frames from blurring, use the timer function when shooting. After starting the timer, remove your hands from the camera so as not to rock it, and wait until the picture is taken. Don’t use a phone for retaking photos, even with good optics, if only because it doesn’t have a tripod socket.

Most tripods do not allow you to point the camera upward. Therefore, if you are using an enlarger, place it horizontally. Attach a piece of white paper to his table to act as a screen.

When using a projector, adjust it so that the image has a diagonal of about half a meter.

Completely darken the room when shooting.

If you reshot negatives, turn them into positives. Not every graphics editor is capable of this. Among the free and easy-to-use editors, Mtpaint is a good one.

Turn on your camera's close-up mode. Position it so that the image fills the entire frame. Make sure the image is in good focus.

Do not post filmstrips and slides taken in the studio on the Internet without the permission of the copyright holders, and frames from your own photo archive - without the permission of the persons depicted on them.

Video on the topic

Despite the popularity and availability of digital photographic equipment, film photography is still of interest. Stores that sell old film cameras and photographic materials do not complain about the lack of customers. There are several ways to print a photograph from film.

Preparation

Type in the classic way You most likely will not be able to take color photographs. This process is far from harmless, and besides, it is now extremely difficult to obtain chemicals and some equipment. In addition, paper for color printing is practically not produced. So it’s best to take the film to a workshop where they can also print photographs. But if you can master black and white printing, fortunately the equipment for it can be bought at a thrift store, and very inexpensively. You will need:
- photo enlarger;
- Red Lantern;
- 3 cuvettes;
- table or large board;
- tweezers;
- pelvis;
- running water;
- developer;
- fixer;
- table vinegar at the rate of 1 tbsp. for 0.5 liters of water;
- dishes for diluting chemicals;
- .
Paper and chemicals can be purchased in specialty stores or online. Of course, you first need to submit the film for development or develop it yourself. This is done in a special tank, which can be purchased in the same place as the rest of the equipment.

Printing in the classic way

You need to print photos in a dark room (for example, in a bathroom) under red light. Dilute chemicals according to package directions. The developer can be in powder or solution, as well as the fixer. Place the equipment on the table. Pour developer into one cuvette, water with the appropriate amount of vinegar (for a stop bath) into the second, and fixer into the third. Place the basin in the bathtub or sink and pour some water into it. Insert the film into the enlarger frame. On wooden base When using an enlarger, you can put a sheet of white paper on it to adjust the sharpness and crop. Before opening a package of photo paper, read what exposure you need. Paper can only be taken out when the light is red. Turn off the light, place photo paper on the base of the enlarger, remove the red glass and hold it as long as necessary (you can use ). Cover the lens with glass and place a sheet of photographic paper into the developer. Hold as per the instructions, then place the print in the stop bath for a couple of seconds and then in the fixer. After fixation, wash in a basin with running water. Finished prints can be laid out on a smooth, water-repellent surface or polished.

Digital printing

This method is suitable for both color and black and white films. You will need:
- film scanner;
- a computer with a program for a scanner and Adobe Photoshop;
- color printer.
Scan the film at the highest possible resolution. Save the picture to your computer. If you want to get a high quality photo, it is best to choose the tiff format. Remember that you will get the minimum suitable print quality with a resolution of at least 300 dpi. If you need to reduce the photo, do it without reducing the resolution. Open the photo in Adobe Photoshop, open the “Image” tab in the top menu - “Image size” and check the “do not change proportions” box. Set right size Images. It must be remembered that even if you increase the geometric dimensions and resolution, this will not lead to real changes in the image size. You can print from Adobe Photoshop, but it is better from some kind of viewing program, where you can also set the position on the sheet.

Video on the topic

Photos taken using the optical printing method can have unconditional family, historical and even artistic value. But ensuring a long life for photographic prints, especially color ones, is quite difficult. Digitizing photographs is the only way to preserve these materials.

You will need

• - flatbed scanner;
• - software for the scanner;
• - a computer with Adobe Photoshop preinstalled.

Instructions

Get a scanner that can scan color images. The working surface of the scanner must not be less photos that you are going to digitize. Usually, an A4 scanner is sufficient to digitize a home photo archive, but some (for example, group) photographs may be large sizes.

Install the software included with your scanner software on computer. Connect the scanner to your computer. Place the photo on the working surface of the scanner with the image facing the glass and be sure to close the lid. The scanner lid must not be opened during the entire scanning process.

On your computer, launch Photoshop. From the File menu, open the import tab. From the list of devices that opens, you need to select your scanner. Next, a scanning window will open in front of you. Conduct a preliminary scan and select the area of ​​the photo or part of it that you want to digitize.

Now you need to set the scanning mode. Start with permission. The standard digital image resolution is 300 dpi (300 dots per inch). You should not take a lower resolution. But optically printed photographs have greater detail than digital ones. This allows you to select higher value scanning resolution, which can be used later to increase the image size. Unfortunately, this method will not produce results when scanning photographs embossed onto cardstock or digitally printed.

It is logical to scan color photos in color scanning mode. With monochrome photographs, everything is not so simple. If you want to preserve the warm tones of Bromo Portrait photo paper or the texture of an old photograph, it is quite possible to scan the originals as color. Color scanning helps perform noise correction or retouching in layers. It all depends on your choice. If you do not intend to use these techniques, you can select the Grayscale mode.

The functions of noise suppression, dust suppression and other additional settings should not be abused. Photoshop has more capabilities for solving these problems, and it would be better to use it. Sometimes it is advisable to increase the scanning brightness for too dark photos, but the level of changes made will have to be chosen experimentally. The scanning process does not affect the photo print itself, so you can repeat it if necessary by changing the settings.

Next, you can begin the scanning process itself. It takes some time, after which the photo will appear in the Photoshop window. In this program you can rotate the image to the desired position, correct color, brightness and contrast, and crop the frame. Here you can also carry out retouching, remove losses, dust and scratches. Photoshop has a very large set of filters that allow you to perform almost any necessary actions with images.

The article was written more than 10 years ago, but the method has not lost its relevance....

Many people in those early times shot with simple film cameras, and sometimes with SLRs. The photographs were printed in minilabs, stored in albums...

Several years have passed and digital reigns supreme in everyday life. Most of the photographs are not printed, but stored on computers. Old albums are slowly thinning out, then one relative will ask for an old photo, then another. At some point, you open an album and don’t find several of your favorite pictures there.

I think many people still have enough non-digitized films. family archives. Film - here it is, I don’t want to print, I want to take a picture into the computer.

Urgently digitize. But with what? A bad scanner digitizes poorly, a good one doesn’t cost much, I already have one at home - the old one doesn’t break down, but it’s a shame to throw it away.

But there is an average digital camera. Maybe they? What brand? I have an Olympus C4000. On the Internet I find among the accessories an adapter for scanning film. Yeah, maybe that means! Buy it urgently! What is the price? What? I bought my camera for this money!

I go to the forums, read reviews, nothing special, just a lens attachment. A friend of mine took slides and gives me a couple of frames for the slides. From a jar for aquarium fish food I make a piece of pipe so that it fits tightly onto the lens (jars come in the most different diameters, so it was possible to select exactly the diameter of the lens) and so that the frame was at the focusing distance of the camera. The main thing is to cut the pipe accurately, keeping it parallel to the plane of the lens. I attach the frame cold welding, which lies in every car enthusiast’s car (45 rubles). Frame for free. Well, the adapter is ready.

I'll rather scan it. First I point at the sky through the window. I take a picture one-tenth, the result is zero. There is no blue channel, no green channel. You don't have to be very smart to understand that you need even, diffused light, like in a scanner. An inner voice says that the idea has failed. Theoretically, I need to look for frosted glass and attach it to my flimsy structure. And the light? Where can I get it? So that the source is smooth? Too much rigmarole. The idea is abandoned.

After some time, sitting in Photoshop, I create new document, it expands to full screen, the background is white. Ha! Here is a source of white, even light (LCD monitor, I can’t say anything about others). So we create a new white document and expand it to full screen and that’s it.

I've been experimenting for a while. And here is almost complete repeatability. You just need to follow a certain sequence of actions

OK it's all over Now.

Examples of all three channels after scanning plus the final shot below. For my camera, after inversion in Photoshop, I selected correction curves; they are approximately the same for the entire film, but differ slightly depending on the brand of film. To speed up the processing process for film, I write an action: cropping, barrel correction, inversion, adjustment layers. Then manually more precise correction.

In these pictures, I deliberately did not touch the barrel so that I could get an idea of ​​what was coming out.

Top down:

• negative,
• red,
• green,
• blue channels