I am doing a project that is going to mix slides, 8mm motion picture film together and I plan to use a computer to finish on (sorry no choice; no one uses VHS or movie film anymore). Anyway, I want to know if there's any real tangible benefits to slides other than them scanning better and my incompetance at printing color neg's (haven't even started yet, but I am not too hot with B&W and color should be 3x as hard). I have heard that color negs don't scan well or are inconsistantly scanned, but I assume that an 8x10 print will scan just as well as a slide on a reasonably priced film scanner in the 3-4000 dpi range (keeping in mind that I don't have a $20,000 drum scanner). For the shots I have on negative that I want to include, would I be better off using the print film Kodak has that makes slides from negatives? I'm going for a cheap, economical approach again, so I figure that since the stuff can be processed at a local one hour photo just like regular negative film (or can it?) it'll be cheaper than making prints and more consistent looking. Has anyone ever made slides from negatives? Are they excessively grainy? Then there's the question of Kodachrome. I love Kodachrome, but I'm worried that it won't scan as well as the Ektas do. I've shot some K25 in 8mm and I must say that it is very contrasty and very saturated. Are there any techniques in making Kodachrome scan better? Would making E-Dupes of my good K-14s provide for better scans? Or does E-Dupe not work well with Kodachrome? Am I just crazy for not using negs?

~Karl Borowski