Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hi, I'm Robbe Nagel and I'm new to this platform.


I'm a student who loves to shoot with analog camera's (using film of course).
I notice that this platform is naturally dominated by digital camera's but I was wondering whether or not I can sell my analog photos.
Can anyone help me out here?

 

I use a very high end photoscanner, so when it comes to quality of the image there must be no problem whatsoever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Scans are subject to the same QC process as digital so others here will tell you it's a lot of work. You'd have to consider the returns- personally my sales here wouldn't even pay for the film.

I only submit archival scans so they bypass QC. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No problem with acceptance or saleability  provided the quality is OK, but, as Mark has said, we mostly use digital cameras as it is so much easier and cheaper to do so.

 

I have submitted 120 size scans via the normal route, but my 35mm stuff has been through archival. I recall spending ages spotting scans, as the slightest imperfection can result in a QC failure.

 

Problem is quality standards change over time as technology improves, so what was acceptable 10 years ago might not be today. 

 

Sadly, although I still have the gear,  I no longer shoot film. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is probably more of a marketing question. Whether it's a digisnap or a laborious 5x4 scan taking hours to produce, you'll get the same fee. There are probably better channels to exploit the uniqueness of images on film.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Bryan,

 

It's great to hear that film still is a possibility. See, I just like to shoot photos anyways when I'm on vacation and the ones I really like and think are of great quality can be put up for sale.
It's not my intention to make a living of this, so every little bit of income is nice. I'm excited to see whether these scans will go through QC! 

 

Bryan, could you help me out with one more thing however. You mentioned 'the normal route' and 'through archival'. I'm not yet familiar with these terms, do you mind explain what you mean with those? Thanks!
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Robbe Nagel said:

You mentioned 'the normal route' and 'through archival'. I'm not yet familiar with these terms, do you mind explain what you mean with those? Thanks!
 

 

 

 

  • What do we mean by archival images?
    Images that are historically or culturally significant, examples include film stills, press archives and specialist collections.

What scanner do you mean when you say I use a very high end photoscanner, so when it comes to quality of the image there must be no problem whatsoever.?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, MDM said:

 

 

  • What do we mean by archival images?
    Images that are historically or culturally significant, examples include film stills, press archives and specialist collections.

What scanner do you mean when you say I use a very high end photoscanner, so when it comes to quality of the image there must be no problem whatsoever.?

I use the Canon CanoScan 9000F Mark II, this scanner can scan up to 9600 dpi.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alamy Reportage/Archival route

 

http://www.alamy.com/contributor/how-to-sell-images/guidelines-for-submitting-images/

 

quote

Reportage/Archival

We have an additional upload route for collections of reportage or archival images which might not meet our technical standards for regular stock imagery.

We have high customer demand for this type of imagery, so if you have a collection then make sure you let us know.

  • What do we mean by reportage images?
    Photojournalistic images illustrating a story but captured under difficult circumstances and might not pass our standard QC checks. Examples include photo essays or features.
  • What do we mean by archival images?
    Images that are historically or culturally significant, examples include film stills, press archives and specialist collections.

You can apply for Reportage/Archival image upload through your contributor dashboard, or by completing this application form.

Unquote

This additional opportunity shouldn't be misused for bad photography that should enter the normal way, though. :)

Niels

Edited by Niels Quist
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Robbe Nagel said:

I notice that this platform is naturally dominated by digital camera's but I was wondering whether or not I can sell my analog photos.
Can anyone help me out here?

 

 

Good quality scans from film (including 35mm) are fine for submitting via the standard Alamy QC route.

I'm sure many here licence (sell) images that were taken on film.

If you scan film images and send to Alamy, then make sure that you check for DUST properly !

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My film scans have passed QC. It was a number of years ago so things may be more strict now but I had no failures.

 

Paulette

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, AlbertSnapper said:

Good quality scans from film (including 35mm) are fine for submitting via the standard Alamy QC route.

I'm sure many here licence (sell) images that were taken on film.

If you scan film images and send to Alamy, then make sure that you check for DUST properly !

You're right, I've noticed quite some dust specs. Luckily my drive for perfection makes it easier to beautifully clean up the smallest fractions of dust.
Sometimes I even find myself at 500%+ to make the photo spotless :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MDM said:

 

 

  • What do we mean by archival images?
    Images that are historically or culturally significant, examples include film stills, press archives and specialist collections.

What scanner do you mean when you say I use a very high end photoscanner, so when it comes to quality of the image there must be no problem whatsoever.?

 

1 hour ago, Robbe Nagel said:

I use the Canon CanoScan 9000F Mark II, this scanner can scan up to 9600 dpi.

 

I'm afraid that does not qualify as a high end film scanner. That is a flatbed scanner with a film scanning attachment but may not produce adequate quality for Alamy QC from 35mm film - maybe from medium or larger format film. I presume you are scanning film rather than prints. What camera are you using?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, MDM said:

 

 

I'm afraid that does not qualify as a high end film scanner. That is a flatbed scanner with a film scanning attachment but may not produce adequate quality for Alamy QC from 35mm film - maybe from medium or larger format film. I presume you are scanning film rather than prints. What camera are you using?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Can you send me your e-mail, I think it's best to e-mail an image to you to give you an idea of the quality I offer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd suggest posting a high res image on Dropbox and posting the link here. Others will advise as well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, MDM said:

I'd suggest posting a high res image on Dropbox and posting the link here. Others will advise as well. 

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1LEnpbHMOuqpvp9PoNcnhIjuDSZHnVFWf/view?usp=sharing

I've done it through Google Drive, hope this is fine as well. This is an older and unedited version, in my final image there are no dust spots anymore.

Edited by Robbe Nagel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless this is already a 100% crop, not sharp enough, IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Robbe,

 

I am sorry to say that a Canon flat bed scanner is not close to "high-end"

 

I would say that 90%of the images that I have on Alamy were 35mm scans

from chromes and they are licensed often.  Keep in mind that it took me

about ten years to finish 800 scans from chromes and all of the images

that I spent the time on were historically important images.  I still have

hundreds of images that I would like to scan for Alamy, but I just do not

have the hours, days and weeks to spend working on them.

 

Something you should look into is "Duping" film with a 24+MP DSLR.

I have been trying this (using a 36+MP DSLR) but have not found a way to

get the same quality that I have gotten using my CANOSCAN FS 4000 and

that is not what most would call a "High-End Scanner"

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Chuck Nacke said:

Robbe,

 

I am sorry to say that a Canon flat bed scanner is not close to "high-end"

 

I would say that 90%of the images that I have on Alamy were 35mm scans

from chromes and they are licensed often.  Keep in mind that it took me

about ten years to finish 800 scans from chromes and all of the images

that I spent the time on were historically important images.  I still have

hundreds of images that I would like to scan for Alamy, but I just do not

have the hours, days and weeks to spend working on them.

 

Something you should look into is "Duping" film with a 24+MP DSLR.

I have been trying this (using a 36+MP DSLR) but have not found a way to

get the same quality that I have gotten using my CANOSCAN FS 4000 and

that is not what most would call a "High-End Scanner"

Thank you for your honesty, I'll keep this in mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My 35mm. chromes and negs were copied with my DSLR on an Illumitran with an enlarging lens but I wouldn't consider them good enough for QC. Perhaps high- end optics would help, and 120 works better, but it's strictly archival for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I should have mentioned that I used a Nikon Coolscan 5000 film scanner and I was scanning slides-- some Kodachrome and some Fuji.

 

Paulette

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Robbe Nagel said:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1LEnpbHMOuqpvp9PoNcnhIjuDSZHnVFWf/view?usp=sharing

I've done it through Google Drive, hope this is fine as well. This is an older and unedited version, in my final image there are no dust spots anymore.

 

I'm afraid that image would not have any chance of passing Alamy QC. The main issues are noise and lack of sharpness as well as some chromatic aberration. If you sharpen it you will increase the noise. You have very few options as you are not working on a raw image as you could be if using a digital camera.

 

The fact is that film is now old technology and good quality digital cameras produce far superior results to film. A truly high end scanner would cost 5-6 figure sums. A medium end scanner such as the Nikon 5000 that NYCat mentions produces very good results that would probably still pass QC if treated carefully but even then it is not certain that they would. I have the predecessor Nikon 4000 which I bought back in around 2001 and at the time the quality seemed amazing. However, when I look at what it does now, even on a Fuji Velvia 50 slide, I am amazed how bad it is in comparison to what I get from my Nikon cameras. Poor sharpness and noise are the issues again but that is in comparison to my DSLRs. That is from dedicated film scanners which were 10 times more expensive than your Canon flatbed. My Nikon LS4000 cost around £1200 in 2001.

 

I would not discourage you from using film for fun and your own personal projects but if you intend to sell images then I would encourage you to aim to buy a decent digital camera and take advantage of the amazing developments in technology. Not only is the quality far better (depending on the camera of course) but the cost involved in shooting and processing film as well as the time taken to scan and edit just make using film unfeasible. 

 

 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, MDM said:

 

I'm afraid that image would not have any chance of passing Alamy QC. The main issues are noise and lack of sharpness as well as some chromatic aberration. If you sharpen it you will increase the noise. You have very few options as you are not working on a raw image as you could be if using a digital camera.

 

The fact is that film is now old technology and good quality digital cameras produce far superior results to film. A truly high end scanner would cost 5-6 figure sums. A medium end scanner such as the Nikon 5000 that NYCat mentions produces very good results that would probably still pass QC if treated carefully but even then it is not certain that they would. I have the predecessor Nikon 4000 which I bought back in around 2001 and at the time the quality seemed amazing. However, when I look at what it does now, even on a Fuji Velvia 50 slide, I am amazed how bad it is in comparison to what I get from my Nikon cameras. Poor sharpness and noise are the issues again but that is in comparison to my DSLRs. That is from dedicated film scanners which were 10 times more expensive than your Canon flatbed. My Nikon LS4000 cost around £1200 in 2001.

 

I would not discourage you from using film for fun and your own personal projects but if you intend to sell images then I would encourage you to aim to buy a decent digital camera and take advantage of the amazing developments in technology. Not only is the quality far better (depending on the camera of course) but the cost involved in shooting and processing film as well as the time taken to scan and edit just make using film unfeasible. 

 

 

Thanks for the advice MDM, I'll see what I can do to cranck up the quality of the image and try again.
If it doesn't work out I might consider buying a digital camera. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Robbe Nagel said:

Thanks for the advice MDM, I'll see what I can do to cranck up the quality of the image and try again.
If it doesn't work out I might consider buying a digital camera. :)

MDM's point is that digital is now sharper that 35mm., it's on digital criteria that QC is done, and that 35mm. slides may now be incapabale of passing QC unless on the slowest film with first-class optics film scanner and impeccable technique.

When I was scanning my archive a while ago it was surprising how many of my images simply weren't that sharp. One simply never viewed at the equivalent of 100%, which, even for a 20MP camera like mine, is equivalent to almost 60x40". Even in my portrait days, I never blew up 120 to more than 30x24. And that was with Zeiss lenses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Robbe Nagel said:

Thanks for the advice MDM, I'll see what I can do to cranck up the quality of the image and try again.
If it doesn't work out I might consider buying a digital camera. :)

 

I think you may have misinterpreted me. As spacecadet says that is not going to work with the scanner you have (you didn't say what camera you are using but I presume 35mm).

 

My Nikon LS4000, which was a very good 35mm scanner in its time, produces images that are so noisy and unsharp in comparison to my DSLRs that I would not submit them to Alamy for fear of messing up my QC record. If you are serious about photography then do yourself a favour and buy a digital camera (I would suggest a Nikon 3000 series DSLR). You can learn all about raw processing which is a vital part of the whole thing, taking the place of darkroom skills back in the old days. Notice I don't say good old days  - modern digital photography is amazing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another couple of thoughts,

 

I see Archival as for old stuff. Doesn't have to be anything special, it could, for example be photos of your neighbourhood from 20 years ago. I've sold archival shots of industrial buildings that no longer exists, some, incredibly enough, were used for calendars. 

 

If using a scanner, and apologies if I'm teaching gran how to suck eggs, but switch all of the automatic gizmos off (sharpening, dust removal etc) and do all of your image enhancement in modern software. From my experience I don't think that a flatbed would produce acceptable scans from 35mm these days, but 120 is probably worth a try.

 

There might still be some places with drum scanners offering a service, but, as has been pointed out, the cost benefit ratio is unlikely to be viable.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.