CalArts 99 Posted September 30, 2012 Share #41 Posted September 30, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Speed isn't everything. I have never scanned a whole film in my life. Other might, of course, but most people still using film are not likely to. I don't either. It takes too long and I don't always know what the final output will be with any given piece of film. Seems like a waste of time and scanner use. Here's one option for a quick and efficient workflow: Sleeve the negatives and/or positives in common poly negative pages. Put the whole page on a flatbed and scan as jpeg but at a ppi that allows for previewing at a larger size than the film frames themselves. Use clear tape to 'stretch' it down a bit on the platen for sharpness (it's not critical since it will become a digital reference and not a final product.) Catalog the scanned negative pages into your favorite cataloging software. Title it in the software and then mark the title on the negative pages themselves (date, alpha numeric or whatever) and outside box or binder that you might use to store the pages. Use whatever digital asset management system you're comfortable with. Your film rolls will be readily viewable in your catalog system along with the film's imprinted negative number and film type/brand easily visible (since you scanned larger.) Your negative pages simply become digital clones of their analog originals. Scanning a film catalog on the flatbed is quick and easy. When you do want to do a full scan, then just pull out the corresponding film strip and do a scan of the frame you need. The 'problem' with scanning a whole roll of processed film is you might not be sure of the final output. Will you be printing on an inkjet or Lightjet (needing a specific ppi for a specific print size)? What print size? Which bit depth? Color space? Or just for the web? Will you need multiple passes? Or maybe no filters (no sharpening or grain reduction)? Maybe you want to go flat for editing for print or scan with final color and contrast corrections for direct to the web and no further editing? Etc., etc.. Scanning all your film at once and at high ppi takes too long. And if you don't scan at high ppi, then you'll have to scan over again for a specific output (e.g., print size) or any of the other variables mentioned above. And any basic flatbed will work (basically you're just making a digital reference file of your analog negative sleeves.) There are many inexpensive flatbeds to choose from that have a transparency option. And it works for all film sizes (roll and sheet.) Anyway, that's what I do. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 30, 2012 Posted September 30, 2012 Hi CalArts 99, Take a look here New Scanner OpticFilm 120. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
philipus Posted September 30, 2012 Share #42 Posted September 30, 2012 Thanks CalArts, very useful suggestions. I have been considering an inexpensive flatbed for this purpose (provided I am allowed by my better half to further expand with photo(-related) equipment...). What flatbed would offer a transparency option? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CalArts 99 Posted September 30, 2012 Share #43 Posted September 30, 2012 Thanks CalArts, very useful suggestions. I have been considering an inexpensive flatbed for this purpose (provided I am allowed by my better half to further expand with photo(-related) equipment...). What flatbed would offer a transparency option? This is the US website for Epson with prices in USD. Canon also offers photo scanners with a platen size that will work with a common negative page. Home & Professional Photo Scanners - Epson America, Inc. The V300 is 70 USD and with a transparency feature. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted September 30, 2012 Share #44 Posted September 30, 2012 I think you have to go up to at least the Epson V700 to get an image area large enough to scan a whole page of negatives at once. http://www.imaging-resource.com/SCAN/V700/images/v7-open.jpg Most of Epson's lower-end scanners have a transparency light source only wide enough for one strip of negatives at a time. http://files.support.epson.com/faq/images/hw_tpu_5_er.gif Even the Epson V600 can only handle one strip of 120 at a time (two 35mm strips). http://www2.pcmag.com/media/images/215739-epson-perfection-v600-photo-transparency-unit.jpg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CalArts 99 Posted September 30, 2012 Share #45 Posted September 30, 2012 Adan, you may be quite right. I'm using the V750 for negative sheets (and as a standard document scanner.) Those images don't show a 'full transparency lid' on the scanners. Phillipus, there may be a work around (scanning sections of the negative page?) or perhaps a scanner somewhere out there that has a full page transparency unit, or find a second hand one for sale (V700.) Sorry if it sounded misleading. But nonetheless, scanning a full roll on a dedicated film scanner does get slow and is problematic for the reasons I mentioned. Before digital, I used to do analog B+W proof sheets in a closet. I used a store bought amber light bulb as a safe light and a white light bulb for exposure, hanging off a lamp cord with a switch I had made. And three small trays for processing on an ironing board in the closet. With RC paper it's fast and washing is simple (and the paper dries very quickly.) If you're processing your own B+W film already, it's an option. Otherwise if you're getting C-41 done at a lab it's probably worth a little bit extra to get some low res proof scans done at the same time of the film processing. It's also a good argument for using E-6 film You always have a positive original. Plus for me, I like the sharpness and the fine grain of reversal film. But that's just my own personal preference (I do also use negative film.) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CalArts 99 Posted September 30, 2012 Share #46 Posted September 30, 2012 btw, here's a trick using a small light box with a flatbed scanner: Making Digital Contact Sheets From Negatives; A Hybrid Solution For The Film/Digital Photographer | Shutterbug It should work just fine. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted September 30, 2012 Share #47 Posted September 30, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) I didn't mean to squash your excellent concept - just wanted to clarify that one should check the scanner being considered. Stitching individual film strip scans into a full sheet will work, of course. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomasis7 Posted October 1, 2012 Share #48 Posted October 1, 2012 pretty cool with separate light head since i have v500. where to find a cheap and good light table? ebay? maybe dpreview forum wil help. lol Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sblitz Posted October 2, 2012 Share #49 Posted October 2, 2012 it's available for pre-order at b&h Plustek OpticFilm 120 Film Scanner 783064365642 B&H Photo Video now i would love to read some independent reviews to see if it lives up to the hype (hope it does) ...... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomasis7 Posted October 3, 2012 Share #50 Posted October 3, 2012 I have found light table when i was in process to find projector for drawing. LightPad A920 Light Boxes, Artograph Light Boxes -- Artograph Inc. I need to measure my V500 at first. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CalArts 99 Posted October 3, 2012 Share #51 Posted October 3, 2012 I have found light table when i was in process to find projector for drawing. LightPad A920 Light Boxes, Artograph Light Boxes -- Artograph Inc. I need to measure my V500 at first. If you're using a negative sleeve page that's 11.5 x 8 inches (holding 6 film strips of 6 frames each) then you'll need a light box that will cover the full page in order to do a whole contact sheet at one time. This light box from the company you linked is what you'd ideally want: LightPad A930, Artograph Light Boxes -- Artograph Inc. The V500 has a scan area of 11.5 x 8, so the 11.5 x 8 negative page will just fit. The above light box is 12x9, but it's okay if it over hangs the platen a bit (like when scanning pages from an over sized hardcover book, etc..) The 12x9 light box will provide a full back light for the 11.5 x 8 negative page. But as Adan says, you can go smaller and simply stitch the scans together. Or divide one contact sheet from a 36 exposure roll into two files (from two separate scans) and catalog it that way. A good light box is always worth the investment, imho. Especially if you ever want to use reversal film. And looking at an 8x10 sheet film positive on a light box will make you want to give up 35mm Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sblitz Posted October 3, 2012 Share #52 Posted October 3, 2012 I am a little unclear as to why u need a light box illuminating the negatives as opposed to simply laying them out on a scanner and closing the lid. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted October 3, 2012 Share #53 Posted October 3, 2012 Because you need light to pass through the negs, not be reflected off them Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sblitz Posted October 3, 2012 Share #54 Posted October 3, 2012 Got it. Thanks. As I head more and more back to film there is more I want to do on my own. Saves some money over time. Now to get my scanner to work with new Mac Os. Tail for different thread Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomasis7 Posted October 4, 2012 Share #55 Posted October 4, 2012 calarts, thanks for the advice. I guess i need find some glas to cover the space between table and scanner surface if there is still space between. I use only negative bw 35mm films. I avoid sheets when you mentioned that What is a good light table? Is this one I linked one too? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted October 16, 2012 Share #56 Posted October 16, 2012 There are some high-resolution b&w images downloadable from Plustek's Facebook page now. The download link is here (the link will probably expire at some point in the future). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
russell Posted October 21, 2012 Share #57 Posted October 21, 2012 The jpg of the Elk hotel looks quite good. Flat across the image. And the detail looks fine. My reference point is the Nikon 9000. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted January 10, 2013 Share #58 Posted January 10, 2013 Some Plustek 120 scans? From Plustek: Here is another brief OpticFilm 120 update. Yes the scanner has started to ship in some regions. In the US, if everything goes right, we will be shipping to our retailers in about 10 days. We have scanners and we are now in the process of creating discs. It shouldn't be too much longer guys! Pete Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
philipus Posted January 10, 2013 Share #59 Posted January 10, 2013 It'll be very interesting to see how the Plustek stands up against other scanners. The two BW tiffs seem, to me, to indicate a fairly soft light source, could that be? There's not much exaggeration of grain or contrast. This is my impression also from looking at the (admittedly a lot smaller) scans in the Flickr stream Pete linked to - see the one with the guy with the spray can (here's the largest image - one can almost read the text on the can!). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted January 11, 2013 Share #60 Posted January 11, 2013 There have been some more very nice looking scans. Even the Kodachrome 64 scan looks nice. Pete Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.