menos I M6 Posted November 25, 2011 Share #21 Posted November 25, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) Tobey, regarding scanning quality, not using drum scanners or Imacon Flextights: "Z" by teknopunk.com, on Flickr "Z" crop by teknopunk.com, on Flickr "Z" crop by teknopunk.com, on Flickr This is a print, I have done several times @ 13x19. The photo is from TriX400 @ 3200 in D-76, shot with a Leica M7 + 35 Summilux ASPH, "scanned" with Nikon D3 + Micro-Nikkor 60 AF-D. If wet scanning does "cure" grain from negatives, it simply washes out detail (all those glass carriers and glass/negative/liquid separations don't really do the photo any good). I wish, I had a AA filter removed high res DSLR at hand, to test out the process with a better hardware (the Nikon D3 sensor really isn't the one, you want for this task). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 25, 2011 Posted November 25, 2011 Hi menos I M6, Take a look here Printing advice please. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
tobey bilek Posted November 25, 2011 Share #22 Posted November 25, 2011 There is no disagreement in the world that drum scans are the best. they are ALL wet scans. I repeat,there is a hugh difference in Minolta 5400 & Epson. I use the Epson to make contact sheets or thumb nails. Any way I told you the way to go. Buy a few rolls and see what you get. Keep in mind some films scan better than others regardless of how they are scanned. Portra, Ektr 100, Tri x T-Max100 or 400, Delta 100 all seem good to scan. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
menos I M6 Posted November 26, 2011 Share #23 Posted November 26, 2011 There is no disagreement in the world that drum scans are the best. … I would loooove, to challenge that common wisdom Tobey ;-) As an engineer, it is absolutely clear, as of the technical superiority of drum scans regarding film flatness, but I would love a good challenge, comparing the same 135 film on a drum scanner vs a setup at lower cost, using a DSLR. Regarding print output though, my method has not only surprised myself, but employees of the lab, I am working with, who didn't believe, the 13x19 has been scanned with my method, seeing the detail (these people use Hasselblad Flextights and large format EPSON printers on a daily basis). It clearly is superior to any flatbed solution. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CalArts 99 Posted November 26, 2011 Share #24 Posted November 26, 2011 It clearly is superior to any flatbed solution. That's assuming we're talking only about consumer products. Even the Flextight is a consumer product. In the world of commercial scanning there are super high quality flat bed scanners (Creo, Cruse, etc.) and drum scanners that will absolutely out-produce any consumer set up. A drum scanner can focus capture spots sizes from 3 microns (independent of the resolution) out of several optical spot sizes (18 for the Aztek Premier) matching the film's grain. And with a drum scanner, flatness on the drum is one thing but there is also the PMT to consider as far as dynamic range and grain management. They can pull the full dynamic range out of a piece of film. There is no comparison to a "home" set up whether it's a consumer CCD scanner or a DSLR. (I personally have hands-on experience scanning with the Aztek Premier drum scanner producing the exhibition and museum works of William Eggleston, Barbara Kruger, John Divola, Larry Sultan, John Baldessari, Uta Barth, Richard Misrach, and many others.) Scanning with consumer products is still the weak link and always will be the weak link. Basically you are compromising and are simply using what you are okay with accepting. I find that the current consumer devices (and techniques) are fine for small prints, digital archiving, and web work. For exhibition work, simply go to an established atelier such as Laumont Studio in NYC or Frank Weldon or Lumiere Editions in Los Angeles, etc.. There's really no sense in this sort of "challenge." I have had several examples from DSLRs, CCD consumer film scanners (including the Flextight), and consumer flatbeds come through the door. The drum scan of the same piece of film (when properly scanned by a skilled operator; the operator and software can also be a weak link), is clearly better in shadow detail, full dynamic range, and sharpness. Again, since it rarely makes sense for an individual to spend 75k or more USD for a scanner, then one just makes do as a consumer and uses consumer products. But then one does have to make certain compromises and accept what they are personally willing to accept. In many cases (and depending on the final product and its use) one can be okay with using a consumer CCD scanner or DSLR. I have no issues with that. btw, Aztek has software available for many of the discontinued Howtek drum scanners. One can buy used Howteks for relatively good prices these days. Some of drums are interchangeable with the current Aztek drums and of course the Aztek drum mounting station is also available. They also have Howtek parts and many parts are interchangeable (the Aztek is basically a new Howtek.) Downside is service and any major repair as the Howtek isn't officially fullly supported anymore. But it's worth considering if you want to take the time and take the plunge into drum scanning your own film. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CalArts 99 Posted November 26, 2011 Share #25 Posted November 26, 2011 For exhibition work, simply go to an established atelier such as Laumont Studio in NYC or Frank Weldon or Lumiere Editions in Los Angeles, etc.. Oops, sorry, a complete brain slip: I meant John Weldon (I had Frank Green in my head at the time and conflated John and Frank into one ) Weldon Color Lab John Weldon Sorry John! Those of you in the LA art world and beyond probably know John quite well. And also know Frank Green in Burbank, the Ciba/Ilfochrome master...... The Lab - Index Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Holy Moly Posted November 26, 2011 Share #26 Posted November 26, 2011 in a former thread I linked this adress here: DigiLightBox. Digitalisierung mit System. There is no English version but the pics speak for itself. DSLR + lighttable + macrolens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
haroldp Posted November 26, 2011 Share #27 Posted November 26, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) Tobey, regarding scanning quality, not using drum scanners or Imacon Flextights: "Z" by teknopunk.com, on Flickr "Z" crop by teknopunk.com, on Flickr "Z" crop by teknopunk.com, on Flickr This is a print, I have done several times @ 13x19. The photo is from TriX400 @ 3200 in D-76, shot with a Leica M7 + 35 Summilux ASPH, "scanned" with Nikon D3 + Micro-Nikkor 60 AF-D. If wet scanning does "cure" grain from negatives, it simply washes out detail (all those glass carriers and glass/negative/liquid separations don't really do the photo any good). I wish, I had a AA filter removed high res DSLR at hand, to test out the process with a better hardware (the Nikon D3 sensor really isn't the one, you want for this task). the D3x not only has higher res, but a much weaker AA filter ( a very different 'look' ). The much rumored D800 will be 36 mp and an option for no AA filter. (we think) Regards ... Harold Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kokoshawnuff Posted November 26, 2011 Share #28 Posted November 26, 2011 I have a V700 and get great B&W results suitable for web and up to 8"x12" prints. I use a plustek for larger prints (giving noticeably better results for 12"x18" prints). I use the V700 because it can scan 24 negatives at a time, which speeds up the whole tedious process of scanning. **One thing that I have noticed (at least with 35mm film) about the V700 is that whole frames will not be scanned when using the film holder and selecting 'thumbnails.' To get the full frame with no cropping you must manually select the frame with your cursor, or lay the film directly on the glass using the 'film area' guide (something I do with a sheet of 8"x10" ANR glass).** Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
philipus Posted November 29, 2011 Share #29 Posted November 29, 2011 So as a matter of curiosity I built a light table using two 3200K LED arrays and set it up with my 5DmkII and the 100mmf/2.8L on a tripod. A happy go lucky contraption just to see what I could get. The below b/w photo is from a roll of Ilford HP5 Plus which was developed by a lab in town. I should add that I'm pretty new to rangefinders and may not have managed to set perfect focus. First is the tiff file scanned by my Nikon Coolscan V. Second is the Canon file, shot as RAW, converted to DNG during import into Bridge. Neither image had any post-processing (beyond inverting the Canon file in CS5). 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! The scanner image looks more contrasty at first. But looking at the 100% crops it's quite clear that the camera managed to pull more from the neg than the scanner and that the camera file is sharper. Can someone recommend a proper repro "rig" for this that doesn't cost millions? Ideally it should have some form of rails so it's easy to move the camera and obtain best focus. Also I'd like some form of holder for strips. Cheers philip Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! The scanner image looks more contrasty at first. But looking at the 100% crops it's quite clear that the camera managed to pull more from the neg than the scanner and that the camera file is sharper. Can someone recommend a proper repro "rig" for this that doesn't cost millions? Ideally it should have some form of rails so it's easy to move the camera and obtain best focus. Also I'd like some form of holder for strips. Cheers philip ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/166999-printing-advice-please/?do=findComment&comment=1857596'>More sharing options...
Guest Holy Moly Posted November 29, 2011 Share #30 Posted November 29, 2011 just look at my link above: an inexpensive set up for medium format and 35 mm. They get Lego bricks at work...! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
too old to care Posted November 29, 2011 Share #31 Posted November 29, 2011 I use a slide/film copier to "scan" my 35mm film when I need to do a bunch of negatives fast instead of using my film scanner. My camera is a Pentax DSLR with 50mm macro lens, a bellows and slide/film holder. I believe bellows and slide holders are available for most other camera brands. The two files below show my setup and a negative I just copied and converted in PS. I use this setup for color too. 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 Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/166999-printing-advice-please/?do=findComment&comment=1857699'>More sharing options...
philipus Posted November 29, 2011 Share #32 Posted November 29, 2011 just look at my link above: an inexpensive set up for medium format and 35 mm. They get Lego bricks at work...! Thanks HM, I had overlooked that link. Seems like a good setup. I use a slide/film copier to "scan" my 35mm film when I need to do a bunch of negatives fast instead of using my film scanner. My camera is a Pentax DSLR with 50mm macro lens, a bellows and slide/film holder. I believe bellows and slide holders are available for most other camera brands. The two files below show my setup and a negative I just copied and converted in PS. I use this setup for color too. Wayne Looks like a great setup Wayne. What film holder are you using - is it Pentax-specific? Do you use natural light from a window or such as the light source? cheers Philip Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
too old to care Posted November 29, 2011 Share #33 Posted November 29, 2011 The whole setup is Pentax and I use window light for the light source. I have seen slide copiers on the internet for other cameras. I used to own a 5DII (before I got the K5) and at one time had located one for it on ebay, but I did not buy it. I also used the 5DII and a 100mm f2.8 L series macro to copy some slides. I taped them to the inside of my kitchen window (double pane glass) and taped a piece of white paper on the outside to diffuse the light. I then put my camera on a tripod rather close and shot the slides. I was surprised to how well that worked. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
menos I M6 Posted November 30, 2011 Share #34 Posted November 30, 2011 Aah Philipus - finally - that makes the third or 4th only, who share their experiment openly and found, how much better the DSLR process to scanning is. I almost felt like barking against trees and people still buy crap scanners these days instead of digging that old DSLR out of the wardrobe ;-) I use light tables from Kayser (chinese made, sold as an OEM part in the Kayser catalogue). I use panorama rails with quick plates and adjustable joints for a setup - not cheap but extremely precise and sturdy (the whole setup would even out with the cost of a EPSON V750). I use at the moment Plustek film holders, but will machine my own, once I find the time. My goal has been always, to not only raise the quality bar towards drum scanners and Flextights, but also, to drastically reduce operation time. A roll is scanned at 12MP raw file quality with usage of Autofocus in 15min (the Nikon D3 multi point single drive AF does wonders, even on very low contrast negatives, it could be even improved by using a more modern AF lens, but I preferred the older AF-D design of the 60mm macro as of it's better distortion and definition for reproduction @ 1:1). Key for a really productive workflow is shooting tethered directly into your DAM archive. Fiddling with individual files really is an unnecessary slow down. For this to work though, you have to shoot with Autofocus and must be able, to rely on it! You must focus each frame individually for best quality, when shooting macro @ 1:1, the slightest bit off robs you detail. Also make sure, that you operate your macro lens in its absolute best spectrum of performance (subject distance and aperture wise - this is, why I choose specifically the older Nikkor 60 AF-D over it's newer design, which is a lens with such a high reputation, that even Canon shooters do adopt it, to use on Canon bodies - inconvenient for our purpose though, as of the loss of AF!). My next step is employing film transport automation with superior holders and a better sensor for scanning (those D800 rumors look delicious ;-) ) Another upgrade of my process includes precise sensor movement and stitching for scanning medium and large format negative film on 1:1 pixel level with 35mm sensors. I guess, I have to upgrade to SSDs and a newer Mac, once making that step. I am even having thoughts of manufacturing the rig (there is such a solution for sale, made of MDF board and low-cost "one fits all" design, which does look like a nice solution for home use for sale already). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
menos I M6 Posted November 30, 2011 Share #35 Posted November 30, 2011 Thanks @ CalArts 99 for the information on drum scanning. I will be very interested in the process (+ finding a good processor for comparison, once upgrading my system). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted November 30, 2011 Share #36 Posted November 30, 2011 Menos, I've done some work using a Bowens Illumitran slide copier and a 5DII camera to copy slides. It uses a Schneider copy lens. I got good results but not quite what I can get from my Polaroid Sprint Scan 120 scanner. But it is close and much much faster of course. And the raw files can be individually adjusted and then batch processed for conversions to Tiffs. I am not sure if by using a different lens I could get it as good as the scanner does. (I have a Nikkor 60 Macro I could try.) But considering that although a 5DII has 21 megapixels, it has to interpret colors whereas the scanner samples each point with red, green and blue. So that might explain it. Since you are trying to automate the process, have you ever seen or heard of negative carriers for Beseler enlargers called "Negatrans?" A Negatrans uses a wheel driven rubber belt to move each frame into position. They are available for 35mm and 120. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
menos I M6 Posted November 30, 2011 Share #37 Posted November 30, 2011 Menos, I've done some work using a Bowens Illumitran slide copier and a 5DII camera to copy slides. It uses a Schneider copy lens. I got good results but not quite what I can get from my Polaroid Sprint Scan 120 scanner. But it is close and much much faster of course. And the raw files can be individually adjusted and then batch processed for conversions to Tiffs. I am not sure if by using a different lens I could get it as good as the scanner does. (I have a Nikkor 60 Macro I could try.) But considering that although a 5DII has 21 megapixels, it has to interpret colors whereas the scanner samples each point with red, green and blue. So that might explain it. Since you are trying to automate the process, have you ever seen or heard of negative carriers for Beseler enlargers called "Negatrans?" A Negatrans uses a wheel driven rubber belt to move each frame into position. They are available for 35mm and 120. Alan, thanks a lot for this tip! I didn't' know about them. I will see, if I can find a 35mm and a 6x6 unit. A word for the function - I understand, that the negative carrier rail in the Negatrans is fixed, while the film slides through the rail, transported by an internal rubber belt - is this correct? The transport of the frames works by the external wheel manually? Are there any intents for finding the frames or do you have to align frame by frame visually? This sounds like a nice solution for initial scanning before cutting the film and would entirely prevent from fiddling with negative holders! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted November 30, 2011 Share #38 Posted November 30, 2011 Alan, thanks a lot for this tip! I didn't' know about them.I will see, if I can find a 35mm and a 6x6 unit. A word for the function - I understand, that the negative carrier rail in the Negatrans is fixed, while the film slides through the rail, transported by an internal rubber belt - is this correct? The transport of the frames works by the external wheel manually? Are there any intents for finding the frames or do you have to align frame by frame visually? This sounds like a nice solution for initial scanning before cutting the film and would entirely prevent from fiddling with negative holders! The idea behind the Negatrans is that it could be placed into the enlarger and then you could feed a strip of film into it. So you can lock this down in front of your light source and align a camera above it. Then you insert the film and turn the wheel to position it. There are no detents so you have to align the film visually. With an enlarger the light would be on at this point and it would be pretty fast and easy to get the frame position set. The 35mm Negatrans is glassless and it does not put the pressure on the film that a standard negative carrier would. (Holders for film scanners don't usually press the film flat either.) If your film is curly from edge to edge, you probably have to be fairly stopped down when copying it. (There are probably ways to flatten your negs via pressure and time.) It crops into the edge of the frame very slightly so this may not work for you, or perhaps you can enlarge the opening a tiny bit. (Beseler says this reduced opening was needed for the transport mechanism to work.) The 120 Negatrans uses glass on one side and has a system using a lever for applying some pressure once the frame is in place in the opening. I had both Negatrans but mostly used standard and glass holders. I found this link by searching for "Beseler Negatrans." It should explain everything. http://www.backglass.org/duncan/darkroom/beseler_negatrans_instr.pdf Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
philipus Posted December 4, 2011 Share #39 Posted December 4, 2011 I just came across this page of tips for scanning with a DSLR Camera Scanning | dpBestflow (posted over at LinkedIn's Digital Black and White Photography Group) cheers philip Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
menos I M6 Posted December 5, 2011 Share #40 Posted December 5, 2011 Great find Philip! I liked especially the tips with Lightroom. It's strange, I never tried, to make the negative inversion in Lightroom, since I knew, it was not possible with Lightroom 2. I always went the long way over Photoshop ever since! Thanks! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.