Jump to content

Using a DSLR to digitise color negs


giordano

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My old Coolscan III is refusing to work (may be something to do with Windows 7 recently installed) but I need to scan a few color negs for web use.

 

I set up my D700 with a 1:1 macro lens and a diffuse light source so I can photograph the negatives, but so far after inverting the colours in Photoshop Elements 9 I haven't been able to manipulate the image to get a convincing positive. And I can't find prints to use on my modest flat-bed scanner.

 

If anyone can give me or point me to some guidelines it would be a *big* help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you say colour negative? Difficult to do with DSLR.

 

It is the orange cast that is problematic and difficult to eliminate in PP, something dedicated negative scanners are designed to handle but not DSLR + PP software.

 

Perhaps someone else can offer more in-depth explanation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As Mladen said, this is not easy and the results are no where as they would be with a scanner. But, you can get something good enough for the internet. Below are the steps I did on a rather old negative. I used a 1:1 macro lens and shot the negative using a white piece of paper behind it about a foot away and being illuminated by the sun. Then it was to Elements.

 

The next post will show the rest of the steps and the final result. Again, nothing to brag about.

 

Wayne

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The rest of the steps. Hope this helps.

 

Wayne

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited by too old to care
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have found that the base problem is that shooting at 1:1 produces somewhat 'fuzzy' images, basically I suspect, because the grain isn't quite imaged. If you have the time and patience and are prepared to do it, then I'd suggest working at higher magnifications and stitch the images together after optimising the resulting raw files as a batch and applying identical settings to all. Without a scanner this gives the best results that I have been able to achieve.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have found that the base problem is that shooting at 1:1 produces somewhat 'fuzzy' images, basically I suspect, because the grain isn't quite imaged. If you have the time and patience and are prepared to do it, then I'd suggest working at higher magnifications and stitch the images together after optimising the resulting raw files as a batch and applying identical settings to all. Without a scanner this gives the best results that I have been able to achieve.

 

This is what I found too. I have, but did not use for this example, a slide/negative attachment with double bellows for my Pentax DSLR that I once used to copy slides. (The above example was shot with an old Panasonic 4/3rds using an Olympus 1:1 lens)

 

Even though it is a double bellows, and I reverse the lens (50mm, 1.4 set to f8) for normal flatness at 1:1, I never could get results even as good as my Canon flat bed scanner. I now use a Plustek scanner and love it. It gives great results, much better than anything else I have.

 

Wayne

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've found an interesting way to digitize frames with a DSLR and LEGO bricks....:

 

DigiLightBox. Digitalisierung mit System.

 

I just took a glance at it, it looks interesting. I will spend some time there reading about it.

 

I would love to have a way to get quality scans from a 2&1/4 negative. So far my scans are bad and I would rather use something like this with my DSLR rather than a flatbed scanner. It seems like it would be faster and maybe better.

 

Have you used this, and if so, can you post some images?

 

Thanks,

 

Wayne

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes Andy, I know. Since I got my Hasselblad I have come to realize that an Epson is a must for good scans. My Canon flatbed scanner just cannot do the shots justice. I have been comparing prints made in my darkroom and those scanned, and there is no comparison. However, when I compare my M6 shots scanned on a Plustek and those from the darkroom, there is not much difference. My wife is going to kill me, I want to spend more money.

 

Thanks,

 

Wayne

Link to post
Share on other sites

John as an alternative, consider trying Vuescan now that you have Windows 7. Free trial and I recommend the pro option for unlimited upgrades later.

Although there is a workaround apparently, the Nikon scanning software is basically now broken.

If you read the instructions with Vuescan it has some excellent tools for colur neg in particular.

My old Coolscan III is refusing to work (may be something to do with Windows 7 recently installed) but I need to scan a few color negs for web use. .....
Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Holy Moly
I just took a glance at it, it looks interesting. I will spend some time there reading about it.

 

I would love to have a way to get quality scans from a 2&1/4 negative. So far my scans are bad and I would rather use something like this with my DSLR rather than a flatbed scanner. It seems like it would be faster and maybe better.

 

Have you used this, and if so, can you post some images?

 

Thanks,

 

Wayne

 

Sorry Wayne, this was just a hint. The price in Germany is about the same as for the Epson V500 (discontinued). I don't trust this 'simple' method........

 

Reflecta shipped yesterday their first batch of the new medium format scanner MF5000 to dealers and hopefully to some magazines for testing. A salesperson told me that there might be a slightly lower quality compare to the Nikon 9000.

The retail price of the Reflecta is around € 1.500 - double amount compare to the Epson 750 but difference in quality? Let's wait.......

 

I#m not a MF shooter, mainly some negs from an old Zeiss Ikon, YashicaMat and a 6x9 pinhole. Nothing to jump deep into costs I think.

Link to post
Share on other sites

John, doing color negs with a DSLR is a pain.

I don't shoot color, just the odd snapshot roll of Superia 200 (maybe one in a month or two).

 

I do all my BW neg scanning with a DSLR though and am pretty confident, to say, that the quality is on par with Hasselblad/ Imacon scans of the same negs.

 

My setup looks pretty similar to the one for sale with the help of Lego (I didn't believe my eyes !).

 

I use a Nikon D3 + 60/2.8 Micro-Nikkor AF-D and a light table.

I don't use Lego or plywood, but a very precise setup with panoramic gear, misused, to build a repro device.

 

The secret for ultimate quality (regardless from color or BW) is, to have the film as flat, as possible and use a Macro lens, specifically designed for this repro work (the 60mm Nikkor is) within the sweet spot in subject distance and aperture.

Only shooting RAW suffices, as the in camera JPGs and TIFFs really rob acuity.

 

The D3 is NOT the ideal camera to do this, but is the only, I got handy at the time of my first experiments and it kind of stuck.

 

I print up to 13x19 without any additional work or issues form the 12MP D3 "scans".

If I need bigger prints, I have to use tubes for higher magnification and stitch.

 

I would not buy a flatbed again, after I have seen the difference between EPSON flatbeds, a Imacon scanner and my method.

 

As a start for color neg "scanning", I would do this:

 

Expose a blank frame of the film stock, you are intending to scan.

Shoot with your DSLR a WB card through the film stock and experiment with exposure and white balance corrections before and after negative inversion.

 

Take note of your best settings and apply them to a real frame.

 

Take care, that while shooting with the DSLR 1) you really use the best exposure, to end up after simple inversion with a good exposure already - if you have to correct your black and white clippings drastically after inversion, your initial exposure is bad.

 

The more off your exposure, the worse your outcome including white balance correction.

 

Both the BP and WP correction and the WB correction as of the colored film stock adds significant "pushing around" of the files, resulting in noise and odd colors.

 

You might need, to take three frames with different exposures for each color channel and merge these individual color channels later in Photoshop, as the latitude of the file for corrections might not be enough.

 

Find out your ideal settings, take notes and apply them in a streamlined workflow from setup over shooting to post.

 

I found, that doing my negative scanning, I can do one roll of 36 exposures in 6 frame strips within 15min and higher quality, than any film scanner does in minimum 30, mostly 45min !

 

This and the quality improvement over flatbed scanning was my main drive, to choose the DSLR solution over buying a Coolscan 9000 or even a second hand Imacon Flextight.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

John as an alternative, consider trying Vuescan now that you have Windows 7. Free trial and I recommend the pro option for unlimited upgrades later.

Although there is a workaround apparently, the Nikon scanning software is basically now broken.

If you read the instructions with Vuescan it has some excellent tools for colur neg in particular.

 

Thanks, Geoff, but I've been using Vuescan Pro for many years and versions. I booted into Win XP and the scanner still didn't work so it's not a Win 7 problem. It kind-of-worked the first time I fired it up with Win 7 but since then has refused to detect the film, either with the auto feed or the manual slide/negative holder. So I guess the problem is inside the scanner; when I get time I'll open it up and investigate. Or maybe it's just that the SCSI interface is past its use-by date. :(

Link to post
Share on other sites

John, doing color negs with a DSLR is a pain.

I don't shoot color, just the odd snapshot roll of Superia 200 (maybe one in a month or two).<snip>

 

Thanks for the detail. I'm using my D700 (only DSLR I have) with the old 60/2.8 AF macro. I've used some of my old Alpa Macrostat gear to set it up, with a focusing lamp and an old Metz 45 on quarter power bouncing off a white reflector and through opal glass in the Alpa macro stage. I clamped the Coolscan negative holder on top of the macro stage. Aperture at present is a nominal f/6.3 or 7 (ISO200). This seems to get the histogram nicely placed.

 

Result so far (this is about 10% of the original negative, taken with an M6, 35mm Summicron IV and Fujicolor 200); When I have time I'll go back and re-do it.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

Setup:

NB: curtains drawn and lights dimmed when actually making exposures.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you actually had Imacon scans done of the same negatives so that you can compare?

 

Can you show us some examples, please?

 

Yes and no.

 

I have had Imacon scans done by the professional lab, I have my film developed now.

I don't have these scans anymore, as the ones, I produced with the DSLR method were simply better.

 

The detail in the Imacon scans is there, with the right sensor (AA filterless Nikon 12MP sensor or maybe a D3x or D7000 sensor), acuity is equalled, I guess.

The biggest selling point of the Imacon/ Hasselblad Flextights, it's sharpness across the frame with perfect focus is the biggest issue with ALL flatbed scanners and also the limitation of even the expensive Coolscan series of Nikon scanners.

 

This is taken care of with the DSLR method with perfectly focussing each and every single shot, with film holders, that are holding flat and with an appropriate aperture used.

 

My biggest concern with flatbeds was, that as I shoot a lot of low light and therefore highly pushed BW film, the film grain completely lost shape and acuity with lesser scanning methods and following digital post processing.

I found a really nice way with the DSLR method and a workflow through Lightroom and Photoshop, that improved a lot.

 

I do not have quality samples online, as I do careful scanning and high res file handling only for prints. Here is one of the samples, which represents a quick and dirty scan with the D3 (not carefully set up or even stitched at higher magnification):

 

5171118546_bbc62e927e_z.jpg

"Z" M7 | 35 Lux ASPH | TriX400 @ 3200 | D-76 1:1

"Z" | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

 

5171117084_c37d0137b4_z.jpg

"Z - crop" M7 | 35 Lux ASPH | TriX400 @ 3200 | D-76 1:1

"Z" crop | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

 

5170514453_4762ac42c2_z.jpg

"Z - crop" M7 | 35 Lux ASPH | TriX400 @ 3200 | D-76 1:1

"Z" crop | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

 

No noise reduction has been applied btw - people always freak out, when I tell them, how clean and nice TriX400 looks @ ISO3200 ;-)

I like grain.

 

@John

This basically equals my setup in function with the only difference of using a lighttable (this could help you with consistent illumination and an easier white balance correction ).

I suggest, you also use a USB cable, to connect your D700 to your computer and trigger the D700 directly through tethered shooting in Adobe Lightroom.

this way you completely prevent the hassle with moving the files.

You also can instantly inspect a shot for exposure and highest detail, saving a lot of time and hassle.

I always shoot NEF + JPG this way and directly invert the JPGs in Photoshop.

These inverted JPGs can be used as a quick shot for web, mail, photo sharing, while the NEF file is there, to be prepared for print.

 

You mention your used aperture - check your lens.

This lens is reported, to have it's peak performance ~ f8.

I use mine @ f8 + a little.

 

With my light source, I end up with shutter speeds around 1/15.

 

I shoot like this for a quick scan of the roll (about 15min or slightly less and much better quality than any flatbed).

When preparing best quality prints, I use Mup and do not shoot through Lightroom (no Mup on the D3, when tethered with Lightroom).

Edited by menos | M6
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I hadn't thought of tethering. Yes, it would be convenient, but it's nice to have the mirror up.

 

As for aperture, I haven't done the sums properly yet. Without floating elements a nominal f/8 is an effective f/16 at 1:1, so diffraction starts to come into the equation. The 60/2.8 AF shortens its focal length to some extent as it focuses closer, so the ratio between nominal and effective will be less.

 

If I can't get the Coolscan working again I'll do some systematic experimentation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Before I got the Plustek this is the setup I used to copy 35mm negatives. I got reasonable shots with it, but now I want to use it for 2 & 1/4 negatives after seeing Menos posts, they look great. I will start looking around for someway to modify the film holder to hold a larger negative. I do not want to do color, but I would love to do better scanning B&W without spending much more money. This setup has to be better than the Canon 8800F that I now use.

 

Wayne

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...