Film (Negative) Scanner - Aldi Special Deal  - £29.99
77°Expired

Film (Negative) Scanner - Aldi Special Deal - £29.99

£29.99ALDI Deals
14
Found 22nd Mar 2012
Ok - I know this will only appeal to some of you 'of a certain age' (ie not digital)..but I know that I have literally thousands of photos ...and negatives..that I would like to save digitally - hmmmm - or perhaps not. !!!

This seems a really good bit of kit. Other 1800 dpi resolution scanners seem around the £40-£50 mark. Its Tevion - but with the usual 3 year guarantee.
.
■5.1 Megapixel, high scan quality with 1800 dpi
■Automatic exposure and colour balance
■USB 2.0 connector

■1 Negative film holder
■1 Slide feeder
■1 Cleaning brush
■Integrated USB cable
■Sanning software

Cant wait for all the school pictures to start appearing !!
Community Updates
ALDI Deals

Groups

14 Comments
I would be amazed if this produced anything other than mediocre results. I scan negatives in b&w and colour as well as slides.

It's a slow process that requires much more than a press of a button to get anything like a reasonable digital file and that video showing how the negatives are being scanned would lead to dust and hairs all over your finished file.

It's just not that easy.


Just what I've been looking for, thanks........and if the results are mediocre Aldi are great with refunds.
Can't Lose
Hello Onkel!
Lyrrad

I would be amazed if this produced anything other than mediocre results. … I would be amazed if this produced anything other than mediocre results. I scan negatives in b&w and colour as well as slides. It's a slow process that requires much more than a press of a button to get anything like a reasonable digital file and that video showing how the negatives are being scanned would lead to dust and hairs all over your finished file. It's just not that easy.


I have a similar gadget.
Not noticeably slow, good results and easy-peasy.

Mind you, I AM talking from experience and not just trolling on something I know nothing about. (_;)
Edited by: "Pluun" 22nd Mar 2012
I suppose if it was no good you could just return it for a refund.....I have loads of negatives and this would be ideal to input them on a hardrive or disc for future viewing.
Pluun

I have a similar gadget.Not noticeably slow, good results and easy-peasy. … I have a similar gadget.Not noticeably slow, good results and easy-peasy. Mind you, I AM talking from experience and not just trolling on something I know nothing about. (_;)




Oh boy.

I use Minolta Dimage Scan Elite 5400 for my 35mm negs/trannies and I use Minolta Dimage Scan Multi Pro for my medium format work.

So my experience with the item on offer here is zero, but my experience with scanning in general is pretty good IMHO.

I never said it was slow by comparison to anything. The process of scanning negs PROPERLY is just slow fullstop. I said I would be surprised if this produced anything other than mediocre results. The dpi is poor for 35mm as a starting point and as there seems to be no glass holders I would imagine the heat generated will cause problems with anything other than a short run as there will be curl on the negs. However I do understand that my standard I set myself my be higher than the average person just wanting to get old negs into their computer. In general I dismiss about 85% of my reversal film at lightbox stage and then scan the rest. Out of that 15% I would imagine a quarter of those would then be worked on in Photoshop

If this is easy-peasy and your happy with the results that's fantastic, but I can assure you in the real world the results will be mediocre.

ps. I would recommend Vuescan scanning software if you have a batch of scans to get through but I am unsure if this scanner would be supported. That said I do believe that it is possible to use it choosing generic scanners




Edited by: "Lyrrad" 23rd Mar 2012
I totally agree with you Lyrrad, I now have the same scanner as yourself, I have tried 7 lower priced versions in the past but with no joy, the quality just wasn't there. At the end of the day I suppose it all depends on what you want and expect from the Aldi scanner. I have no doubt that the Aldi scanner should do the job, but I would rather pay a bit more and get better quality. Its worth a try though if you are in doubt and take advantage of Aldi's return policy if it isn't the right one for you.

Good Luck
Lyrrad

Oh boy.I use Minolta Dimage Scan Elite 5400 for my 35mm negs/trannies and … Oh boy.I use Minolta Dimage Scan Elite 5400 for my 35mm negs/trannies and I use Minolta Dimage Scan Multi Pro for my medium format work.So my experience with the item on offer here is zero, but my experience with scanning in general is pretty good IMHO.I never said it was slow by comparison to anything. The process of scanning negs PROPERLY is just slow fullstop. I said I would be surprised if this produced anything other than mediocre results. The dpi is poor for 35mm as a starting point and as there seems to be no glass holders I would imagine the heat generated will cause problems with anything other than a short run as there will be curl on the negs. However I do understand that my standard I set myself my be higher than the average person just wanting to get old negs into their computer. In general I dismiss about 85% of my reversal film at lightbox stage and then scan the rest. Out of that 15% I would imagine a quarter of those would then be worked on in PhotoshopIf this is easy-peasy and your happy with the results that's fantastic, but I can assure you in the real world the results will be mediocre.ps. I would recommend Vuescan scanning software if you have a batch of scans to get through but I am unsure if this scanner would be supported. That said I do believe that it is possible to use it choosing generic scanners


Which world do you live in that you CHOOSE to ignore "Not noticeably slow, good results and easy-peasy" ?

I bet you never shop in PoundLand, just out of principle.! (_;)

Also, I think 5.1 megapixel resolution is better than the average printer can reproduce s any "mediocre" results will be the fault of the printer.

But don't take the word of someone who actually owns and uses one of these. (_;)
Remember, the ONLY way to get good results is to buy the dearest model available but then you have to spend the rest of your life, taking every oportunity to justify the outlay.

Edited by: "Pluun" 23rd Mar 2012
Pluun

Which world do you live in that you CHOOSE to ignore "Not noticeably … Which world do you live in that you CHOOSE to ignore "Not noticeably slow, good results and easy-peasy" ?I bet you never shop in PoundLand, just out of principle.! (_;)Also, I think 5.1 megapixel resolution is better than the average printer can reproduce s any "mediocre" results will be the fault of the printer.But don't take the word of someone who actually owns and uses one of these. (_;)Remember, the ONLY way to get good results is to buy the dearest model available but then you have to spend the rest of your life, taking every oportunity to justify the outlay.



You are embarrassing yourself by even mentioning 5.1 megapixels. I would never scan a neg at 35mm 1800dpi, nor would anyone that actually wanted to end up with a reasonable quality image.


10 packets of Walkers crisps from Poundland. Yes please. USB lead from Poundland, yes please. Scanner from Aldi. I'll pass.

I fully accept that someone with more skill that I have could produce a better image using the exact same equipment I have using the exact same negative. There is definitely a technique involved in scanning. However you cannot tell me that a compact camera is able to produce the same results as a full frame DSLR, so why do you seem so adamant to insinuate that this budget scanner, with a very low scanning dpi of 1800 can produce anything like the detail that IS to be found in film compared to 5400dpi. We are not talking megapixels here. We are talking about the ability to extract the information that IS in the film.

As I said, if you are happy with your results that's fine, but you have to realise that just because you are happy with those results, it doesn't make them good.







Edited by: "Lyrrad" 23rd Mar 2012
Lyrrad

You are embarrassing yourself by even mentioning 5.1 megapixels. I would … You are embarrassing yourself by even mentioning 5.1 megapixels. I would never scan a neg at 35mm 1800dpi, nor would anyone that actually wanted to end up with a reasonable quality image.10 packets of Walkers crisps from Poundland. Yes please. USB lead from Poundland, yes please. Scanner from Aldi. I'll pass.I fully accept that someone with more skill that I have could produce a better image using the exact same equipment I have using the exact same negative. There is definitely a technique involved in scanning. However you cannot tell me that a compact camera is able to produce the same results as a full frame DSLR, so why do you seem so adamant to insinuate that this budget scanner, with a very low scanning dpi of 1800 can produce anything like the detail that IS to be found in film compared to 5400dpi. We are not talking megapixels here. We are talking about the ability to extract the information that IS in the film.As I said, if you are happy with your results that's fine, but you have to realise that just because you are happy with those results, it doesn't make them good.


Emperor's new clothes. (_;)
As I said. If you're happy with the results you got that's cool.
Edited by: "Lyrrad" 24th Mar 2012
Whoa...only posted a deal guys lol . I have no experience of scanning negatives and so I take the comments of those who do.
I do know to do them professionally is expensive.
I do know I cant afford an expensive bit of kit.
I do have thousands of photo negatives - some frames I would like copies of .!! This gets real in a divorce!!:|

The kit I posted seemed good value for the resolution quality compared with 'similar' items. I have no idea how good it is - but I understand you can return it if you are unhappy.
I bought one of these today. My expectations weren't high but I'm still disappointed. It's not just the low resolution; the colours are inaccurate and anything pale appears as white. There's no point in making adjustments in the software - the detail just isn't getting captured.

Not sure whether it's faulty or just not a very good product. Either way, it's going back.
Post a comment
Avatar
@
    Text