Tossing Negatives After They've Been Scanned

[RezaLoghme]

....like worshipping cameras, but not images....

In case that was meant to relate to my recent shopping spree...

I have no illusions about what is going to happen to my cameras when I am gone. They will be sold, and I am sure someone will be clever enough to yield a halfway decent price.

But I dont expect the world to faff over them and put them in a museum,

 

[GregY]

In case that was meant to relate to my recent shopping spree...

I have no illusions about what is going to happen to my cameras when I am gone. They will be sold, and I am sure someone will be clever enough to yield a halfway decent price.

But I dont expect the world to faff over them and put them in a museum,

Not at all Reza, just a general comment that this forum and others like RFF....mostly discuss gear....and not photography....much the same as music forums talk about instruments/collections...not music... just the unfortunate state of the world.....

 

[RezaLoghme]

Maybe you are in the wrong section of the forum? I found a lot of interesting discussions about the image side of photography.

This thread is about tossing negatives, and my Leicaflex thread was about that. I think this forum offers a great variety of topics.

 

[Craig]

@mschem You're right, 122 negs are going to be a bit oversized to fit into a 4 x 5 scanning holder. If I can't scan them directly on the glass I may have to trim off a bit of the negs?!

I've scanned negs directly on the glass, it works fine. I used pieces of paper to make a mask around the negs and that worked well. Better masking than trimming the negatives.

 

[GregY]

Maybe you are in the wrong section of the forum? I found a lot of interesting discussions about the image side of photography.

This thread is about tossing negatives, and my Leicaflex thread was about that. I think this forum offers a great variety of topics.

Just look at today's topics....the majority are about gear

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

It's easier to talk about gear for the majority of people, I suppose.

 

[koraks]

It's easier to talk about gear for the majority of people, I suppose.

Yeah. Probably has something to do with the fact that it's fairly easy to put words to hardware and process aspects - aesthetics, composition, philosophy etc. are often a lot harder to discuss. How do you describe a gut feeling?

In any case, it's fine to discuss either/both/everything here.

 

[MattKing]

Yeah. Probably has something to do with the fact that it's fairly easy to put words to hardware and process aspects - aesthetics, composition, philosophy etc. are often a lot harder to discuss. How do you describe a gut feeling?

In any case, it's fine to discuss either/both/everything here.

Yes, because of the fact that this is the Ethics and Philosophy sub-forum, and as long as that is the sort of approach to the thread you are taking.
If you want to start talking about resolution comparisons between specific lenses for your XYZ camera - that belongs elsewhere

 

[Vaughn]

It's easier to talk about gear for the majority of people, I suppose.

And many of the issues we come across as photographers, including what and why we photograph, naturally involve equipment, material, and chemical processes. They are the tools of our work. Those learning photography need to gain some control of their equipment and process(es) and gain experience before they know which directions are possible to head towards.

And one of the things most of us learn is to keep one's negatives safe, because who knows what direction might be next.

 

[ezphotolessons]

Not at all Reza, just a general comment that this forum and others like RFF....mostly discuss gear....and not photography....much the same as music forums talk about instruments/collections...not music... just the unfortunate state of the world.....

It’s the common denominator and has nothing do with taste or skill.

 

[ezphotolessons]

How do you describe a gut feeling?

It’s not easy, but it has to do with cultural openness, which is about finding similarities instead of differences . Many people have forgotten how to do that.

 

[loccdor]

I came across another person new to film photography the other day who is not keeping their negatives. All they had were relatively low resolution jpegs from a local lab. Seems they just picked it up to try it without thinking too much about it - no knowledge of exposure or depth of field. They weren't satisfied with their pictures but it also didn't seem like they had ever been taught the basics or even tried to teach themself. We all start somewhere, but we all require a certain level of interest and dedication in order to make progress.

 

[tokam]

I've scanned negs directly on the glass, it works fine. I used pieces of paper to make a mask around the negs and that worked well. Better masking than trimming the negatives.

I think I'll do the 122 negs last and I have some black paper to cut a mask and then scan them directly on the glass. Just have to figure out settings in Epson scan software, or I also have Vuescan so I have a few choices.

When finished I'll start a gallery entry for any people interested for a look see. I've done around 100 of the 116 negs and there is probably another 50 to go. Curiously a lot of the 116 negs have a vertical band of increased negative density. At first I thought it may be a processing error but it appears on lots of negatives. Did any 116 cameras have a horizontal running focal plane shutter? If so it could be shutter capping? the band of increased negative density doesn't appear at the edge of the frame or in the gaps between frames so I don't think it's fogging through the camera bak.

 

[DREW WILEY]

I'm about ready to toss my scanner, not my negatives. If I need a digital record for cataloging purposes, I'll do it with my DLSR via the copystand using actual darkroom prints; those are what count. But even that amount of digi futzing around makes me nauseated, just thinking about it. It might help my heirs figure out what to do with the collection, and be a favor to them, but on my end, just another unwanted tedious chore.

 

[wiltw]

Just look at today's topics....the majority are about gear

...very dependent upone WHICH forum...there is one which is a spinoff from a forum whose key guy passed away in the past year, and about all the threads are themed posts of photos, with little very little technical discussion, and not much gear-oriented discussion.