Digital to 35mm

[purenvdesign]

Hey everyone,

Usually I see the question I'm about the ask in reverse but I hope someone can help me!

I'm looking to put my digital files onto 35mm negatives. Does anyone know a company that can do this in the UK?

There is a company called 'Digital Slides' but I'm hoping to find somewhere cheaper as £50 for 24 images seems a little dear (especially when I only want a couple done)

Thanks for all your help in advance.

 

[norters]

Firstcall do it I think.

 

[s162216]

Hey everyone,

Usually I see the question I'm about the ask in reverse but I hope someone can help me!

I'm looking to put my digital files onto 35mm negatives. Does anyone know a company that can do this in the UK?

There is a company called 'Digital Slides' but I'm hoping to find somewhere cheaper as £50 for 24 images seems a little dear (especially when I only want a couple done)

Thanks for all your help in advance.

Its not exactly a high demand service so you'll expect the price to be fairly high if your referring to their B&W negative service, which as it says is on demand so I think its entirely reasonable for them to have a minimum order.

There are quite a few other places in the UK which will output to slides (positives), but apart from the place below (which doesn't give prices unless you ask), I can't find anywhere else in the UK that will do it as negatives (there was a quite high profile lab that advertised they were doing it for large format negatives a while ago, I'll try and remember what their called).

http://www.digi2slide.co.uk/index.html

EDIT: Firstcall Photographic do it for £22.50, but they don't process it so you have to do it yourself or factor processing costs in (~£5.00 + p+P from most labs). They don't mention how many you can have per film but I assume 36. I should just point out though that their outputting them on Ilford Pan 100 which is a lower quality film that only tends to be distributed abroad whilst the Digital Slides service above output on Kodak T-Max 100 so you can guarantee high quality.

http://www.firstcall-photographic.co.uk/information/10/processing-services

Personally I would find a few more images than 'a couple' to output to make it a bit more economical!

 

[kenm]

Not sure why you want to do this, but if you can print the images maybe rig up some sort of copystand? Proper ones are probably few on the ground these days, but my enlarger, and I suspect most, allows the head to be removed and a camera mounted instead. Fix up a light source, check the exposure with your DSLR and job done for little money.

 

[AJQS]

Take picture of monitor with appropriate camera and lens?

 

[excalibur2]

Not sure why you want to do this, but if you can print the images maybe rig up some sort of copystand? Proper ones are probably few on the ground these days, but my enlarger, and I suspect most, allows the head to be removed and a camera mounted instead. Fix up a light source, check the exposure with your DSLR and job done for little money.

h'mm labs are not cheap so it seems the cheapest and easiest way if you have a film camera......
Easy with any film camera with a decent 50mm lens is to just place the A4 photo on the floor\ground and take shots. But even if you use the best macro lens, the quality will only be as good as the print :shrug:

 

[kenm]

h'mm labs are not cheap so it seems the cheapest and easiest way if you have a film camera......
Easy with any film camera with a decent 50mm lens is to just place the A4 photo on the floor\ground and take shots. But even if you use the best macro lens, the quality will only be as good as the print :shrug:

With a Leica and an AE1 and a decent printer reasonable results should be achievable. Even more so with using an enlarger as a copystand, which can be had for about 50 quid. There isn't room on my floor for an 8x10 print.

Brian, think I just worked out you were agreeing with me.

 

[excalibur2]

Brian, think I just worked out you were agreeing with me.

Indeed ...but I would just stand over the photo and take a shot......but flash is dodgy, and proof is my cock up

 

[kenm]

Cool self-portrait?

 

[excalibur2]

Cool self-portrait?

It was my 35mm shot with 200 ISO neg film (probably superia) , and my son had it enlarged and framed by a lab, and I was amazed at the quality....mind you with programs you can de-noise ( reduce grain) but don't know if they used it, or how they did it, and did ask my son to get the scanned file (assuming they drum scanned it)....but he forgot :bang: :shrug:

 

[s162216]

It was my 35mm shot with 200 ISO neg film (probably superia) , and my son had it enlarged and framed by a lab, and I was amazed at the quality....mind you with programs you can de-noise ( reduce grain) but don't know if they used it, or how they did it, and did ask my son to get the scanned file (assuming they drum scanned it)....but he forgot :bang: :shrug:

Its unlikely that most labs would use a drum scanner for their negatives as their too much work (set up time, cost etc) for results that are inevitably going to get downsized to more manageable formats where their superior results will not be as visible.

By default, most lab systems will apply noise/grain reduction for all films of ISO 400 and above, for a shot that big it is likely that the person scanning the neg would have likely applied it as well so to reduce the visible harshness of the grain. Do remember though that for larger prints the actual quality will usually look good from a metre or two away, but close up it will look worst.

 

[excalibur2]

Its unlikely that most labs would use a drum scanner for their negatives as their too much work (set up time, cost etc) for results that are inevitably going to get downsized to more manageable formats where their superior results will not be as visible.

By default, most lab systems will apply noise/grain reduction for all films of ISO 400 and above, for a shot that big it is likely that the person scanning the neg would have likely applied it as well so to reduce the visible harshness of the grain. Do remember though that for larger prints the actual quality will usually look good from a metre or two away, but close up it will look worst.

..but nice to know that when digital guys are spending £500-£1500 on their gear...you still can get very good results from 35mm film gear that cost me under £20 including, OOD film and dev

 

[pingu666]

if you have a tripod, or something solid to rest camera on use a 10sec timer, and no flash

or get print scanned

 

[purenvdesign]

Thanks guys I'm going to give it a go with FirstCall as I don't think £22.50 is too bad for 36 exposures.

I tried using the enlarger as a copy stand last week but I just wasn't happy with the results. When I get them back, Ill let you know my experience and compare the two methods.