←back to thread

251 points QiuChuck | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.205s | source
Show context
skhr0680 ◴[] No.45895230[source]
Scanning 135 format at home is pretty much a solved problem right? The home made solution to this costs $0 if you own any DSLR and some other basic photography gear.

I think the product would be more compelling and worth it or even a good deal at the price they are offering if it offered drum scan-quality for larger formats.

replies(1): >>45895594 #
jdelman ◴[] No.45895594[source]
The workflow for this scanner would allow you to thread an uncut roll of 35mm film through it. You'd have to spend more than $0 to get that kind of speed on a DSLR rig.
replies(1): >>45896013 #
skhr0680 ◴[] No.45896013[source]
1. I had never even heard of an uncut developed roll of film before, so I guess it's useful for that.

2. Time is money, but who is honestly shooting that much 135 film that it's worth 1600 Euros to buy a faster scanner for it? I don't think a museum wants to feed degraded film through a fast scanner, and surely pros who still shoot film would use a larger format, since that's where it has some differences / advantages compared to digital?

replies(2): >>45896384 #>>45900599 #
1. ares623 ◴[] No.45896384[source]
Some influencers that make money directly from their photos could find it beneficial. Although as the saying goes, the fastest way to make money with photography is to sell your gear!