I’m pretty sure the camera used 35mm film, and after I got film rolls developed they were returned to me. I’d just have to find them… And then I assume I could pay for them to be scanned?
The camera was really cheap, just one of those all-plastic with a small lens, not protruding from the body of the camera, basically disposable camera-grade except your could reload film. But since it used film, the film was the “sensor” of the camera so to speak, so the quality should still be good, right?
Is this at all possible?
In: 4
Absolutely, and you’re probably better off getting those old photo negatives scanned at much higher than 4K, as 35mm still cameras have a larger surface area than 35mm movie cameras -they use the same film, but still cameras are horizontally oriented and “movie” cameras are vertically oriented (this is also why IMAX film is so high-res – it’s 70mm film horizontally oriented).
Since the surface area is much larger than a 35mm movie’s surface area, if the negatives are in decent condition and they weren’t an absurdly grainy stock, you might have much **more** than 4K to work with!
But it’s all very dependent on the film stock used. It might be very finely-grained with a lot of fine detail, making a high-res scan worth it, or it might be very coarsely-grained, so a high-res scan won’t be *useless*, but somewhere along the line you’re just preserving the large amount of grain at higher fidelity without getting any more *detail* out of it than you would at lower resolutions.
Latest Answers