Topic: MF scanners and glassless scanning?!

[Thom Stone]

Hi y'all, haven't started a topic on here in a while and I finally have some questions I need answering and as usually google is just throwing up a confusing bunch of forum threads. So thought I may as well consult the brains at the best film photography forum on the net.

I have recently ONLY been shooting medium format. I love it. my go to camera is my Mamiya rb67 as many of you know and I am getting sick of forking out for sub standard scans from my local lab. So I have been looking at budget scanners (and when I say budget I MEAN budget) looking at old epson flat beds that are now discontinued. the Epson Perfection 4180 crops up quite often and I am watching a couple on the big auction site that don't seem to be going for much. I was wondering what peoples experiences are with these older lower budget models.

Also I seem to remember seeing something about Epson Perfection 4180 "Glassless Scan" in the description of a photo on flickr recently. surely this can't mean some mad man has hacked out the glass on his flat bed in search for a sharper image? would this not just destroy the sensors and mirror and the rest of the black magic sorcery that goes on in these devices? thoughts, opinions.. EXAMPLES also would be great.

Cheers fellas. (and fellettes) 

[Miller]

Thom

I went through the same scenario except I also wanted the ability to hit 5x4 up to 6x12 as well so I could just call it a day... Also wanted to do Polaroid neg reclaims....

The Canon 9900F can be had for upwards of £50.00 and there is one on the Bay now for £85.00.

Solid machine that doesn't look like a relic from the past like some of the old Epsons that everyone bids on so never go cheap enough.

Also check out the later 9950F that also does 5x4 and goes for sub £100.

http://www.photo-i.co.uk/Reviews/interactive/Scanners/Canon%209900F/page_1.htm

[Francois]

glassless scan???
The holders are glassless... but rely on the glass for support.
That is unless the guy had removed the glass on his scanner and replaced it by something of the same thickness with a hole cut in the center.

I never thought of that.

[LEAFotography]

That's interesting, is there a 5x4 film holder for the 9000F? I should make one really...

[Thom Stone]

glassless scan???
The holders are glassless... but rely on the glass for support.
That is unless the guy had removed the glass on his scanner and replaced it by something of the same thickness with a hole cut in the center.

I never thought of that.

yeah this baffled me too. I couldn't work out how he would support the neg holder. seems rather risky to me but if I can snap this epson up cheap I may try it with my current epson perfection 3490 first as an experiment as it is worth nothing and in no condition to sell on.

[Thom Stone]

Thom

I went through the same scenario except I also wanted the ability to hit 5x4 up to 6x12 as well so I could just call it a day... Also wanted to do Polaroid neg reclaims....

The Canon 9900F can be had for upwards of £50.00 and there is one on the Bay now for £85.00.

Solid machine that doesn't look like a relic from the past like some of the old Epsons that everyone bids on so never go cheap enough.

Also check out the later 9950F that also does 5x4 and goes for sub £100.

http://www.photo-i.co.uk/Reviews/interactive/Scanners/Canon%209900F/page_1.htm

 oh and thanks for the advice miller. the 9900F may be a good future proof solution. especially if I end up purchasing that new ilford pinhole! great affordable intro to large format. kinda excited.

[mcduff]

I am wondering it the scans you are seeing are from someone that is scanning with different methods and the ones you were seeing that were the "glassless" scans did not have a sheet of glass holding it down. They may have been dealing with curly negs and tried a sheet of glass, only to get newton's rings so they decided their "glassless" version worked better. I suggest this as sometimes my files have cryptic names that only mean something to me and then I put them on Flickr this way.
BTW, Francois had a post about a DIY setup using glass that avoided newton's rings.

[moominsean]

Not sure how you would do a flatbed without glass, but these kind are glassless. Considered getting one just because of the dust factor.

http://www.nikonusa.com/en/Nikon-Products/Product-Archive/Film-Scanners/9237/Super-COOLSCAN-9000-ED.html

[Doug Fisher]

The light source in the 3170 and 4180 is of really poor and uneven quality.  Wait until you can find a used 4490 or later with a moving light source in the lid.

Glassless scanning doesn't help on these scanners in my experience to be worth it and deal with the possible problems.  If you see tests that show it does, make sure that the tester did a valid test because often their film will shift in terms of flatness/film suspension height between the scans, thus any difference you see will be due to a difference in the film plane between two scans versus glass or no glass.  Here are my test shots from a rig I made for my 3200.  Also, be warned that your optics are much more likely to get dirty when you don't have full glass coverage.

http://www.betterscanning.com/scanning/glasslesstest.html

Doug

[DonkeyDave]

I'm afraid the 9000 would be beyond Thoms means, I've got an 8000 given to me back in the day (!). The scans are pretty good with the glassless carriers, but the glass carrier keeps the film really flat and is much better, really significant. The disadvantages of 2 glass layers are outwayed by the increase in resolution with a perfectly flat neg.
I use Dougs 120 film holder with antinewton glass for the same effect on 612 and 617.

I read this this thread last night, and I dreamt of you Thom. You bought me some fish and chips, not sure what Freud would say about that?

[Terry]

When I started shooting 5x7 I needed to figure out a scanning system.  I already had 35mm and 120 glass (thanks to Doug) and had made my own carrier for the 35mm.  After reading Francois' post from however long ago that was, I went to my local glazier and got a piece of glass for the 5x7 negs.  I told her what I was doing with it, and she said, "Oh, you want the old-style non-glare picture glass."  So she cut me a piece and I've used it quite happily ever since.  I made a mask/carrier thingy out of some black polystyrene sheet with an appropriate-size hole cut out of it.  Works a treat.

[Francois]

Here's the link to my glass negative carrier in the articles section
http://www.filmwasters.com/forum/index.php?topic=3428.0

[fbf]

I found the best way to scan any format (probably exclude anything above 4x5) is to flatten the film first.   I put them in archive and leave them under heavy books (10 lbs) for about a week.   It eliminates the possibility of newton ring.  I do use the rocket blower before loading anything on the carrier. 
Betterscan glass carrier works pretty well.  I had them on my v500 and 4990 in the past.