Topic: Scanning advice

[lharby]

Hi guys

I have an Epson blah-blah (I think it's a 2540) it has 35mm, 120mm and 4x5 negative holders.

I'd quite like to scan the 4x5s without using the standard holder, as I like the idea of capturing the entire negative (with the borders and notches).

Does anyone have experience of this? I guess the idea is not to have the negative pressed flat to the scanner bed glass, so I thought about sitting it on top of a small glass sheet, but worried that might cause some reflection. Is that the right idea? Ta

[Francois]

The hard thing with scanning is always Newton's rings, especially with the film flat on any surface.
The best solution is always wet mounting the film but this is super messy.

To get the edges, I think the best solution would be a "photoshop" approach to the thing. Scan the edges independently of the image and superimpose them back in photoshop. That way you can have crisp edges that show completely without the trouble of getting newton's rings.

Unless somebody has a better idea, that's how I'd do it.

[lharby]

Thanks Francois.

That sounds very laborious. I am scanning in at 2400dpi so would like to capture it in one go.

I might have a small plate of perspex but I think that tends to be more scratched than the glass. I wonder how it will look scanned directly on the scanner glass?

[Francois]

You will probably get Newton's rings.
Try scanning emulsion down, it's not as bad.

Or... I have a better way!
http://www.filmwasters.com/forum/index.php?topic=3428.0

Check this out and let me know how you like it.
The scotch tape does show a little but it's very minimal. The film stays flat. No Newton's rings.

[Chalky]

I have a v550 (?) and I scan my type 55 negs in 2 sections, placed on the glass in the 120 film area.

then stitch together in Gimp. 

just remember not to preview again before scanning the second section.

[lharby]

Thanks Francois, now I have seen that thread, I am wondering if this what I was thinking about (maybe I have seen it before) it still looks convoluted but needs must.

And cheers Chalky, I think I will experiment today and see what happens.

[Francois]

Once built, the contraption is pretty easy to use.
When you tape the film down, you just have to make sure you tape either just the slightest edge of the whole thing up to the image border.

Dust wise, it's not that bad.

[Nigel]

You will probably get Newton's rings.
Try scanning emulsion down, it's not as bad.

Or... I have a better way!
http://www.filmwasters.com/forum/index.php?topic=3428.0

Check this out and let me know how you like it.
The scotch tape does show a little but it's very minimal. The film stays flat. No Newton's rings.

That article was 2010, it's nice we're still here (or most of us)!

[Francois]

already that old
Boy does time fly!

[Blaxton]

When I am in my apartment away from home, as I am now, I have a fairly humble scanner—an Epson XP-235 "all in one" flatbed scanner—that I use with an iPad and Lightbox app as a backlight source (and negative flattener), emulsion side down, directly on the glass, with VueScan software.  The scanning process certainly is faster than when I am at home, using an Epson 750 (probably $500 more expensive than the XP-235), and the results are at least as pleasing to me.  Mind you, my objective is only to get something more or less presentable for our beloved Filmwasters site (as well as that other F site) and not to print.  (I still am a darkroom printer, exclusively.)  Perhaps there are Newton Rings.  I don’t know or care.  I never have been anti Newton.  Here are three recent photos scanned in this manner.  They were made in an Adox Golf camera on Tri-X, ASA 800, and developed in Rodinol 1:100, semi-stand.  The location was the Centro Português Fotografia in Porto.  I can’t recommend this museum enough.  It has a wonderful permanent collection and the temporary exhibitions are usually mind-blowing.  The building itself is worth the trip.  It was formerly a depressingly formidable jail.  The museum also has an impressive collection of old cameras on display—camera porn at its best.


Generated by [url=http://tools.rackonly.com]http://tools.rackonly.com[/url]


Generated by [url=http://tools.rackonly.com]http://tools.rackonly.com[/url]


Generated by [url=http://tools.rackonly.com]http://tools.rackonly.com[/url]

[SLVR]

When I was scanning with my nikon coolscan I would frequently scan 35mm negatives in the glass 120 holder. It had anti newton ring glass to prevent the rings but the glass wasn't perfect and mostly with 120 it would show up, especially on really curly film.

But scanning this way allowed me to scan the full piece of film. I could scan sprocket holes, film edges, etc.

Might be worth looking into a 120 ANR glass insert for your 120 holder if you want to scan film edges. There is no way to get it with the standard holder. UNLESS you get a 35mm lomography digitaliza. I had one and it worked good on flat films but it wasn't great for curled film at all.

[Doug Fisher]

Fluid mounting is the way to go when you want to capture the entire piece of larger format film.  Once you get your workflow down it isn't that slow.  Yes, the first few times will be slow but you will get faster pretty quick.  A lot of people are now using Gamsol as a mounting fluid which simplifies things for most people because most people can buy it locally at a decent art supply store for fraction of the cost of commercial mounting fluid with its high shipping costs.

If you have a 2450 like you guessed, you can probably gain an appreciable increase in sharpness by introducing a new workflow because the standard holders for that scanner are really bad at flatness control and have no height adjustment to account for the often haphazardly installed optics.  That was Epson's first attempt at a higher quality scanner and they didn't refine things as much as they should have before production.  It can be a relatively decent scanner though if you get things dialed-in.

Doug