how does /p/ scan its 120/220 rolls? it sounds like a lot of

>>2907807
Why don't you ask this question in the film thread or the other current scanning thread, and upload a meaningful image rather than unrelated trash, you fucking numbnuts?

>>2907807

>no tits
>wide as fuck abdominals
>manly looking forearms
>chunky legs

ew

>>2907813
steroids.

>>2907809

somebody get this hothead outta here

>>2907807
MILC on backlit "table", which is an Ikea glass image frame atop of two boxes with a Yongnuo LED covered by a fine white-ish (I found out it has a little hue of blue) cloth used as a second diffuser after the plastic diffuser pointing upwards at it.

I also use a second plastic Ikea image frame cover to press the negatives down.

There are a lot of minor snags and flaws in this setup, but nothing major.

>>2907807
digital camera, enlarger lens, custom bellows & 3D printed parts.

medium format can look ok out of a flatbed for web sizes, the limitations on file format, the slow and finicky process and lacklustre results at larger sizes mean you often sink money into something that will do nothing but frustrate.

Setup a good DSLR rig and dedicate some hours into not only getting the rig working smoothly but also the editing process and you will be a happy camper.

a good enlarger lens will only be around $40, bellows can be had for $25 on ali express, backlighting can be done by a phone/tablet shining through a piece of opal acrylic (although a flash would be slightly preferable due to it's wider colour bandwidth than LED)

if you're going to sandwich the negs between glass, either use anti-newton glass (expensive, hard to find) or high quality non reflective glass for photo frames, a framing shop will hook you up for a couple of bucks. If you use "normal" glass, you will get newton rings.

>>2907807
this is the most disgusting photo i've ever seen

File: Film186.jpg (722KB, 1000x984px) Image search: [Google]

722KB, 1000x984px

I have an Epson V600, I like it

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi

>>2907807
I use both, a V750 Pro and my camera with a macro lens. The scanner lets me be lazy and do a whole row of photos at once, but I get better results from digitizing. Scanners haven't been getting any better these past couple decades, so if you own something with a sensor on the level of a D810 or A7RII, it'll be better than any scanner outside of a drum.

buy a backlit flat bed scanner, will do a good job for all that you need it for, then learn how to correct and enhance your negative scans in photoshop, endless tutorials on youtube

dslr scanning is a pain in the ass and very hard to get results as good as a decent scanner

flatbed is the superior option for mature professionals. dslr scanning is for snapshitting manchildren. this is fact.

What's the point of shooting film if you are going to scan it anyway? Or are you talking about old pictures?

>>2907881
because its nice to use old film cameras and some people enjoy the experience but want digital copies of their photos

>>2907881
I like looking at my pictures on a light table, and prints, but if I want to share my stuff with other people, digitizing them is pretty useful

plus, it allows me to shoot c41 without having to invest in a color darkroom or pay jew prices for bad prints

>>2907881
Because fuck working in a darkroom

>>2907881
((((((((((hipsters))))))))))

I point my camera at a $30 Amazon 4x5 light table
Tripod, 50mm lens, extension tubes

>>2907807
I scan my MF shots on my film SLR and then take it to the local shop to scan it.

>>2907877
> dslr scanning is a pain in the ass and very hard to get results as good as a decent scanner
Yea, you need to figure out your setup initially and maybe buy some thing or another so you can have your light table of sorts and a stand or tripod with macro slider above it, but ultimately, how is it very hard?

Plus I'd go insane waiting for a flatbed or even a strip feed scanner to do its job.

On most models, it takes like 2 minutes to scan 4MP of information into a 32MP file or something like that, and it doesn't get THAT much better on the higher end (though you get less trash data...)

With a MILC, I can do a group of 3-exposure HDR bracketing shots every 5-10 seconds, and capture more information (around 18/24MP per shot with my camera and high end macro lens).

If I wanted more resolution than that, I guess I could take multiple shots of a single negative that I move around next to a marked strip of duct tape or ruler, and then have my computer stitch that together. Or get a higher resolution camera...

>>2907861
>>2907813
>>2907819
I'd beat the shit out of you IRL if I ever met you. Fit has one of your kind for every fucking thread.

>>2907960
underrated

>>2908046
no you wouldnt dick head

>i browse fit i am bigger than everyone else and somehow know how to fight because i do some curls once a week

retard

>>2907807
Fuck the brunette,
Marry the blonde,
Kill the niggress