Tossing Negatives After They've Been Scanned

DREW WILEY · 2025-10-25T14:21:59-0400

If someone encounters a box of old slides or snapshot prints in an attic, they might take the time to thumb through them and see if anything is interesting. But a box of discs or thumb drives, or whatever... Unless "secret Swiss Bank accounts" is written on the box,
the odds are it'll just get tossed. Old discs might be appropriate for skeet shooting, but that's about it. Who knows what "cloud" storage will be like after a major cyber-warfare incident. In a hot war, that kind of storage backup along with Ai centers would be among the first things bombed. That's the fastest way to paralyze modern society and all its infrastructure.

There's nothing uncommon about idiot teachers. But I had some excellent ones too, like the Biology teacher who also taught Home Economics baking classes because he had once been a professional bread baker, and he had played pro football, so was the Football Coach too. Kept on making the best bread I've ever tasted in my life. I grew up with his kids.

Kino · 2025-10-25T15:25:17-0400

gary mulder said:
Darkroom is non destructive editing software.

A raw file is a mezzanine file, meaning it is not in it's final form; The analogy is valid.

If you are willing to discard a negative after making a print or a scan, then there should be no problem discarding the raw file after rendering an interpretive image.

runswithsizzers · 2025-10-25T16:13:46-0400

gary mulder said:
Darkroom is non destructive editing software.

Kino said:
A raw file is a mezzanine file, meaning it is not in it's final form; The analogy is valid.

If you are willing to discard a negative after making a print or a scan, then there should be no problem discarding the raw file after rendering an interpretive image.

When using a non-destructive editor, the RAW file and the interpretive image are the same file. A non-destructive editor remembers the editing steps -- and will apply those edits to a JPG or TIF if the image is exported -- but edits cannot be written to RAW files. In other words, until such time as you export the file, the interpretive image exists only as a set of editing instructions, and not as an actual image file. The instructions are useless without the RAW file.

Alan Edward Klein · 2025-10-25T16:15:57-0400

gary mulder said:
Somehow this thread has become bogged down in an analogue versus digital thread.

Well, this is Photrio.

Alan Edward Klein · 2025-10-25T16:17:11-0400

lecarp said:
I tossed all my scans years ago. After a lifetime in analog photography I find digital with all its necessary
baggage and planned obsolescence inconvenient and annoying.
I say this only as personal preference, if digital works for you excellent.

Some of us don't and can't have darkrooms.

Alan Edward Klein · 2025-10-25T16:21:20-0400

MattKing said:
I have no problem with people making the decision to discard negatives, if the user has a good idea about the value of, and possibilities inherent in, a saved negative.
I am concerned when people who are relatively uninformed about that value, and those possibilities, are encouraged to discard them, on the grounds of economy and convenience.
From a scan I made of an early Kodachrome slide of my father's - the earliest photo I have of my mother. The slide would be nearly 80 years old. You can see more colour in the scan then you can see in the slide itself:
View attachment 410085

Nice shot Matt. I scanned all my family shots from chromes and made digital slide shows. I copied them first onto DVDs and now onto memory cards that can be played on TVs, computers, phones, and other digital devices. I gave the shows to my daughter, who would never bother with the old slides that I believe I threw out. I still have photo albums as well. But I think I threw out the negatives for the prints. I kept them for years thinking I might need them. But I never did after the albums were made.

Alan Edward Klein · 2025-10-25T16:24:05-0400

runswithsizzers said:
When using a non-destructive editor, the RAW file and the interpretive image are the same file. A non-destructive editor remembers the editing steps -- and will apply those edits to a JPG or TIF if the image is exported -- but edits cannot be written to RAW files. In other words, until such time as you export the file, the interpretive image exists only as a set of editing instructions, and not as an actual image file. The instructions are useless without the RAW file.

The instructions are also useless unless you keep paying Adobe for the rights to use Photoshop.

gbroadbridge · 2025-10-25T16:59:53-0400

Kino said:
If you are willing to discard a negative after making a print or a scan, then there should be no problem discarding the raw file after rendering an interpretive image.

Most pros do exactly that, many others do not even bother to create a raw file in the first place and simply use the image generated by the camera, as in you do with slide film.

Negatives are just a byproduct of the final photograph.
Like keeping the cut offs and sawdust after making a nice rocking horse.

Hassasin · 2025-10-25T17:09:12-0400

Tossing negatives as like removing foundation something was built on.

Brendan Quirk · 2025-10-25T17:21:31-0400

MattKing said:
I have no problem with people making the decision to discard negatives, if the user has a good idea about the value of, and possibilities inherent in, a saved negative.
I am concerned when people who are relatively uninformed about that value, and those possibilities, are encouraged to discard them, on the grounds of economy and convenience.
From a scan I made of an early Kodachrome slide of my father's - the earliest photo I have of my mother. The slide would be nearly 80 years old. You can see more colour in the scan then you can see in the slide itself:
View attachment 410085

She looks a happy sort (a total non sequitur...)

mtnbkr · 2025-10-25T17:59:06-0400

Alan Edward Klein said:
Some of us don't and can't have darkrooms.

Yup. I literally had a guy offer me an enlarger and accessories today for free. I'd love to take him up on it, but I don't have anywhere to set it up and likely won't anytime soon (as in years if ever). I have to make do with DSLR scanning.

Chris

Sirius Glass · 2025-10-25T19:02:05-0400

Andrew O'Neill said:
The teacher (who had zero photo background going into this) who took over the photo program of a colleague of mine, a few years ago, does 99.9% digital. One project is film based, and they do make tiny 5x7 prints at the end of the unit. I was talking with him the other day, and he told me that he is saving a heap of money not having to buy negative sleeves for the students... instead, he has instructed them to just toss the negatives. I was speechless!

In my experience when someone tells me that they are scanning all their slides which they will throw out, I just listen. That is not the time to get into the advantages of keeping archival materials.

MattKing · 2025-10-25T20:42:18-0400

Brendan Quirk said:
She looks a happy sort (a total non sequitur...)

I'm guessing that was, from around 1947, when she would have been 21.
My parents married in 1953 and I was born 3 years later.
And basically, she was mostly a happy sort, right into her 80s.
Particularly when I put on that sweater she was always encouraging me to put on

lecarp · 2025-10-25T22:06:18-0400

Alan Edward Klein said:
Some of us don't and can't have darkrooms.

mtnbkr said:
Yup. I literally had a guy offer me an enlarger and accessories today for free. I'd love to take him up on it, but I don't have anywhere to set it up and likely won't anytime soon (as in years if ever). I have to make do with DSLR scanning.

Chris

My entire life the first priority of a new residence was its ability to support a darkroom.
The difference between profession and hobby I suppose. A darkroom wasn't a luxury it was necessity.

DREW WILEY · 2025-10-25T23:53:01-0400

Anyone can have a dark room, Alan. Just refuse to pay your electric bill.

Tossing Negatives After They've Been Scanned

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency