Wogster, people who do not want to learn anything about film scanning only get half of the fun from shooting films. Some of them got pissed when they read posts that talk about scanning films on APUG. I used to process my films and print them in my home darkroom for more than a decade. I got so tired of it because of its inefficiency in producing good prints. It always took so much time. I eventually moved on to other activities and had my photography hobby canned. I nearly abandoned the hobby until I saw a demo of a Minolta Dimage MF film scanner about 10 years ago. It jumped started my film photography again and I have since invested thousands in MF gears and films. I have shot far more films than all the films I shot before getting into scanning.
Originally Posted by wogster
Film scanning is another half of the fun of shooting films. Some will say processing and darkroom is the other half but that's the old way. The new and far more productive way is to process the films then scan them. Unfortunately film scanners are expensive. That is a road block to many who are lurking outside. I took the plunge for one ($1900 in 2002) and never regret it a bit. There is so much to learn technically about scanning even today I still discover new techniques every time I use my scanner.
Film scanning is an extension of shooting films. Before the films are scanned it is only half way through. People on APUG need to realize film scanning is a 2nd half of shooting films. It is not the only way but it is a modern and better way in my opinion. The resulted images have the look of films that are very different from images produced by digital cameras. I picked up my 35 mm gears recently and shot a few rolls of Ektar 100 and Potra VC 160. After I scanned the films I found I like them better than digital camera images still. They have the analog look believe me.
I wish film scanners were still produced at lower prices and decent quality. It would be one way to keep the film industry alive in my opinion.