Author Topic: What are your thoughts on "Wet Scanning" ? (Read 5618 times)

6cmsquare · « **on:** April 01, 2015, 12:56:45 AM »

So I broke down and ordered the Epson V800 film scanner, and I've been watching videos about wet scanning and using the fluid scanning tray....
-has anyone done it?
-got any thoughts?
-what exactly is "optical fluid" and where can I get it cheaply, or how do I make it?

ManuelL · « **Reply #1 on:** April 01, 2015, 09:01:23 AM »

Never done it, but it seems you get a bit more resolution on the upside, but with having several layers (glass, film, milar) introduce a lot more sources for bubbles and dust into the scanning process.
http://www.snowhenge.net/pblog/article/wet_mount_scanning

Kayos · « **Reply #2 on:** April 01, 2015, 10:59:15 AM »

I recall watching a program on restoring ww2 news reels and they used dry cleaning fluid to scan through

LT · « **Reply #3 on:** April 01, 2015, 11:00:13 AM »

It worries me a bit. Does it ruin the neg? Is the neg reusable afterwards to print from properly?

Late Developer · « **Reply #4 on:** April 01, 2015, 12:30:00 PM »

I got the V750 a few years ago and they offered me the kit as a freebie. I declined as:

(a) it sounded messy and a bit gimmicky
(b) I wondered about the impact on negs and the possibility of introducing other stuff that would mess up the scan
(c) I think the liquid is flammable and I wasn't convinced that liquids (of any nature - let alone flammable) was a good idea next to a mains-powered electrical device.

It may be perfectly safe from all perspectives but it doesn't appeal to me.

Francois · « **Reply #5 on:** April 01, 2015, 02:07:37 PM »

Strangely, what I would worry the most about is the liquid getting everywhere and maybe seeping into the scanner...

As for flammable liquids and mains power, as long as there's no spark it would be safe.

And how do you clean the negatives after they've been soaked in the stuff?

scapevision · « **Reply #6 on:** April 01, 2015, 03:15:19 PM »

It's a funny thing fear, isn't it?
Maybe a lot of us don't realize that the best scanners out there to this moment (drum scanners) use liquid mounting. You always hear "drum scanner this, drum that" as the highest possible resolution scan on the interwebs. So how is it that you fear the liquid at home and let the professionals do it without even a blink? I have not done any myself, but I have researched extensively. What I found had me stick to my current dry mount process.
1. too much hassle to do
2. way too expensive to do properly compared to dry
3. benefits not necessarily outweigh the requirements

I'll expand on what I know about the benefits. Some claims have been made that liquid removes any imperfections in film (dust and scratches), increases resolution of scans. None of which have been 100% proven as different proofs exist on the net.
I find I can easily get rid of the dust problem using a steamy bathroom to load my glass holders (4 different surfaces for dust to settle on without counting film itself), and I barely get any dust.
Resolution is not everything when it comes to scans, you downsample it anyway for your web view.

Francois · « **Reply #7 on:** April 01, 2015, 03:25:16 PM »

Actually, drum scanners were probably designed to be used with liquid. I don't think that was in the plans with Epson...

Bryan · « **Reply #8 on:** April 01, 2015, 04:36:26 PM »

With movie film wet gate projection is used to hide scratches and other imperfections. I've never tried it but there are devices made specifically for that purpose. They are used with film cleaner fluids that are made for this purpose.

Late Developer · « **Reply #9 on:** April 01, 2015, 05:18:59 PM »

Quote from: scapevision on April 01, 2015, 03:15:19 PM

It's a funny thing fear, isn't it?
Maybe a lot of us don't realize that the best scanners out there to this moment (drum scanners) use liquid mounting. You always hear "drum scanner this, drum that" as the highest possible resolution scan on the interwebs. So how is it that you fear the liquid at home and let the professionals do it without even a blink? I have not done any myself, but I have researched extensively. What I found had me stick to my current dry mount process.
1. too much hassle to do
2. way too expensive to do properly compared to dry
3. benefits not necessarily outweigh the requirements

I'll expand on what I know about the benefits. Some claims have been made that liquid removes any imperfections in film (dust and scratches), increases resolution of scans. None of which have been 100% proven as different proofs exist on the net.
I find I can easily get rid of the dust problem using a steamy bathroom to load my glass holders (4 different surfaces for dust to settle on without counting film itself), and I barely get any dust.
Resolution is not everything when it comes to scans, you downsample it anyway for your web view.

I feel much the same way about changing the brake pads on my car. With a good read at a manual and a few rudimentary tools, I'm pretty sure that I could complete the task. However, for the few £ extra it costs to have them fitted, I feel a lot more comfortable in the knowledge that when I hit the brake pedal, the car will actually stop.....

6cmsquare · « **Reply #10 on:** April 02, 2015, 02:07:53 AM »

I've done a bit more research since posting this question, and it seems the "optical fluid" is a version of naphtha, similar to lamp oil, or even negative cleaning fluid, so it should evaporate completely after use, and leave no residue, the few tutorials I've seen make it look pretty easy... we'll see.
As soon as my scanner arrives I'll do some side by side comparisons and post them for your viewing scrutiny.

mcduff · « **Reply #11 on:** April 02, 2015, 03:07:44 AM »

I read about the option when I got a v700 and decided against it, despite knowing that wet scanning is the classic drum scan technique. Basically I thought it would be too messy for me and too much work. But I would love to see some a/b comparisons if anyone does it tho.

Bryan · « **Reply #12 on:** April 02, 2015, 04:26:35 AM »

Quote from: 6cmsquare on April 02, 2015, 02:07:53 AM

I've done a bit more research since posting this question, and it seems the "optical fluid" is a version of naphtha, similar to lamp oil, or even negative cleaning fluid, so it should evaporate completely after use, and leave no residue, the few tutorials I've seen make it look pretty easy... we'll see.
As soon as my scanner arrives I'll do some side by side comparisons and post them for your viewing scrutiny.

Naphtha is volatile and flammable, you may blow up your scanner. FilmGuard is used for wet gate projection so it should be safe to use with a scanner. It does not evaporate and does lubricate the film which is good for motion picture film but not needed for still film. It does not evaporate, just wipe it off with a lint free cloth when you are done. Naphtha may evaporate before you're done scanning. The following is a link with more information about FilmGuard.

http://www.film-tech.com/products/filmguard.php

Francois · « **Reply #13 on:** April 02, 2015, 02:28:51 PM »

Naphtha should be fine when held under glass in a thin layer. But I'm not sure I'd want it in my house. If it's related in anyway to mothballs, these things are about to be declared dangerous chemical... And just their stench makes me grind my teeth.

ambaker · « **Reply #14 on:** April 02, 2015, 06:48:57 PM »

Naptha is what is used as lighter fluid in wick type lighters. (Think Zippo and Ronsonal.)

The odor is not strong, but it is flammable. (Obviously, if it is used as lighter fluid.)

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Francois · « **Reply #15 on:** April 02, 2015, 09:04:08 PM »

I always thought lighter fluid was Benzene?
Probably due to the German writing on the can...

jojonas~ · « **Reply #16 on:** April 03, 2015, 11:41:09 AM »

isn't that fluid kind of self evaporating?

Francois · « **Reply #17 on:** April 03, 2015, 02:51:08 PM »

I checked it out yesterday and the good mounting liquids do evaporate.
But it says that lighter fluid, while working, is said to leave some residue that needs to be cleaned after the scan.

Terry · « **Reply #18 on:** April 03, 2015, 03:04:17 PM »

Back to Bryan's point: wet-gate printing was designed for use with motion picture film because it gets knocked around much more than still film (normally) does, running through all kinds of machinery. Wet-gate is necessary if the film is likely to have scratches or other imperfections that would tend to be rare on well-handled still negs. I can see how it would be useful with very old negatives doing some sort of archival work and I imagine that's the market Epson is targeting with the wet-scan option. I just can't imagine needing it.

Francois · « **Reply #19 on:** April 03, 2015, 08:33:08 PM »

Yesterday I was going through some of those wet mounting suppliers websites and I'm starting to really wonder if there isn't something to this wet mounting thing.
Not that it's something I would do for just any negative but when it comes to that special image...

Check this comparison out
http://www.scanscience.com/Pages/SampleScans/Scans.html

ManuelL · « **Reply #20 on:** April 04, 2015, 06:21:37 PM »

Quote from: Francois on April 03, 2015, 08:33:08 PM

Yesterday I was going through some of those wet mounting suppliers websites and I'm starting to really wonder if there isn't something to this wet mounting thing.
Not that it's something I would do for just any negative but when it comes to that special image...

Check this comparison out
http://www.scanscience.com/Pages/SampleScans/Scans.html

Hmm. I am not sure. I get a similar effect when I bump up the "clarity" in Lightroom after the scan. Any images I have seen from independent sources (not companies that want to sell the technology) have not convinced me so far. If I had a negative that I needed scanned with maximum resolution, I would rather send it to a professional drum scanner.

Author Topic: What are your thoughts on "Wet Scanning" ? (Read 5618 times)

Terry