Jump to content

Scanning slides and negatives using a camera


Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Please excuse me if this has already been covered.  I did a search and couldn't find anything on topic.

 

I have about 30 years of slides and negatives, 135mm and 6x6 formats.  The results I'm getting from my Epson flatbed scanner and the 135mm scanner (I forget its name) are okay, but I'm wondering if I might get better results if I use my SL(601).  Is this correct?

 

Can anyone advise if this is worth doing, what I need equipment wise (presumably some sort of holder and a uniform whit background) and if it is feasible to photograph negatives as well as slides?

 

Or am I wasting my time?

 

Cheers

John

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 41
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

No, you are wasting your time when using a slow scanner. But you need equipment: • a filmholder a good and cheaper one:    Essential Film Holder: https://clifforth.co.uk.   Or the deluxe with a Leica price: https://www.negative.supply       I have the essential film holder and i am happy with it. You can also use a negative carrier from an old enlarger. • a lighttable or lightbox (coolest light as possible) between 5000K and 6000K. • a blue compensationfilter 80a for "scanning" col

For converting c41 film it is important to have a cooler lightsource than an ipad can be. You can use an older colorhead from a color enlarger or normlight. I have continous spectrum leds build in my lighttable. The colorcouplers in an negativ emulsion have such an narrow bandwith that it is very importand to have continuous spectrum in order not to exclude some parts of the colorspectrum of the couplers in the emulsion. Cheap LEDs have gaps in the spectrum which you do not want. To avoid to

Thank you, i own the essential film holder. Its a very good tool for a reasonable price. And a nice website with a lot of informations. Thank you for the second link. i will read it at evening… I invest a bit more in light source. I had an old Just norm light table with flourescent tubes. I get rid of them and bought these LED strips and mount it in the lighttable. https://store.yujiintl.com/search?type=article%2Cpage%2Cproduct&q=YUJILEDS®*+Standard*+Illuminant*+CRI*+98*+D50*+5000K*+MC

Posted Images

John,

 

Yes, it can be done with ease.

The result can be good with slides.

Negatives can be less good because of the orange mask that need some corrections in post.

 

Have a look here :

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/275849-useful-to-shoot-some-slide-film-%E2%80%93-beoonm10/

 

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/276684-beoon-enlarger-lenses-to-avoid-recommended-open-thread-please-add-your-experience-for-benefit-of-others/

 

those with Leitz BEOON,

but with a bellow and/or macro lens this can be done also.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Check the scanning forum at RFF, there's a lot of info there.

 

Please excuse me if this has already been covered.  I did a search and couldn't find anything on topic.

 

I have about 30 years of slides and negatives, 135mm and 6x6 formats.  The results I'm getting from my Epson flatbed scanner and the 135mm scanner (I forget its name) are okay, but I'm wondering if I might get better results if I use my SL(601).  Is this correct?

 

Can anyone advise if this is worth doing, what I need equipment wise (presumably some sort of holder and a uniform whit background) and if it is feasible to photograph negatives as well as slides?

 

Or am I wasting my time?

 

Cheers

John

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello,

 

Andreas Beitinger gives a description of his equipment and compares the results with those from a Nikon scanner. He claims the results are comparable in quality with a Nikon scanner. One caveat is there, however: IR-based dust and scratch removal will not be possible. Colour management is possible using e.g. Argyll.

 

Also colour negatives are not a problem. Removing the orange mask is essentially a white balance issue. For details see CFS-244 (http://www.c-f-systems.com/Docs/NegativePositiveCFS-244.pdf sorry, the link in this forum always works only once).

 

Hermann-Josef

Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/257324-the-unthinkable-switching-from-vuescan-to-silverfast/page-5?do=findComment&comment=3560309

 

well, most of page 5 covers this

 

 

 

 

and also Godfrey's setup https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/286558-a-personal-cl-review/?p=3560376

 

Please excuse me if this has already been covered.  I did a search and couldn't find anything on topic.

 

I have about 30 years of slides and negatives, 135mm and 6x6 formats.  The results I'm getting from my Epson flatbed scanner and the 135mm scanner (I forget its name) are okay, but I'm wondering if I might get better results if I use my SL(601).  Is this correct?

 

Can anyone advise if this is worth doing, what I need equipment wise (presumably some sort of holder and a uniform whit background) and if it is feasible to photograph negatives as well as slides?

 

Or am I wasting my time?

 

Cheers

John

Edited by frame-it
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

"Duplicating" slides was done with cameras for decades before scanners came along. I used to get film "dupes" made of my color slides, when sending copies of travel stories/photos to multiple newspapers for publication.

 

Honeywell, when it was the U.S. Pentax distributor in the 50s and 60s, created the "Repronar" - a single copying unit with a variable-brightness (and even filterable) "stage" or lightbox, bellows, and a Pentax body modified for a waist-level finder, etc. etc.

 

https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/honeywell-repronar-model-805a-slide-1732225660

 

You might be able to hack one of those to hold an SL body, with an old Leica-R bellows and lens. Or use it as a model to build something similar yourself.

 

As with any photo-replicating system, it all comes down to: quality of the light source, quality of the lens, and quality of the operator.

 

Ideally, for 1:1 reproductions, a lens optically designed for that scale and for bellows mounting - a true macro prime lens (Elmar 65mm or Elmarit-R 60mm or 90 Macro-M), or even better, a micro-lens (Leitz Micro-Summar, Photar, Milar - or similar from Pentax, Nikon, etc.), or an enlarging lens - will give the best resolution. The dedicated 1:1 lenses in your scanners are similar. (NB - the micro lenses have ungodly-short focal lengths (12.5mm, 16mm, 24mm). But they are not "wide-angles" - that is just to increase their magnification to 10x or 30x on a given bellows length, when needed.)

 

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/SUMMAR

 

The Repronar device came with a Pentax 5 cm f/4 "Repronar II" lens - essentially a darkroom-enlarger lens, like the Leitz Focotars.

 

As you no doubt know from scanning, slides have a ferocious density range, and it is often hard to squeeze detail out of their dense shadows without the highlights flaring. Honeywell offered an accessory for the Repronar that was basically a very thin (1-2mm/16th-inch) optically-flat ~4x5" piece of glass that mounted at 45° between the slide and the imaging lens, to bounce "fill light" from a secondary light box into the image path, to "open up" slides' shadow areas.

 

Not that you need or want to check all those boxes yourself - just some historical ideas you might want to borrow from, if you put together your own system.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My apologies, I forgot to answer the most important question in your OP, John - whether you'd be wasting your time.

 

I tried digitizing using an EOS 5D2 and the 100L macro with the film on a simple light table. The results easily matched what I get from my Coolscan V ED and it was a surprisingly quick affair to shoot a whole roll once the workflow had been set up.

 

The one thing I didn't like much was the lack of digital ICE for dust but now, several years later, I am doing fine without that function on an X1 and use an Ilford Antistaticum cloth which works like magic. Sure I need to spot the scans but it usually takes just a minute or even less.

 

There are lots of posts online about getting rid of the orange mask on colour negative films but the easier approach is just to use the Photoshop plugin ColorPerfect.

 

If you have a suitable digital camera and lens it's a very very simple thing to set up and try.

 

br

Philip

 

 

Thank you Hermann-Josef, Philipus & Arnaud.

It seems like mastering my scanner and the scan software might be a better use of my time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please excuse me if this has already been covered.  I did a search and couldn't find anything on topic.

 

I have about 30 years of slides and negatives, 135mm and 6x6 formats.  The results I'm getting from my Epson flatbed scanner and the 135mm scanner (I forget its name) are okay, but I'm wondering if I might get better results if I use my SL(601).  Is this correct?

 

Can anyone advise if this is worth doing, what I need equipment wise (presumably some sort of holder and a uniform whit background) and if it is feasible to photograph negatives as well as slides? ..

I've been digitizing transparencies and prints, both positives and negatives, since 1984. Thousands of them.

For the first decade I did it as part of my work with incredibly expensive machines that the company paid for.

 

I bought my first film and flatbed scanners in the middle 1990s so I could do my own work at home. For 35mm, a good film scanner (mine is a Nikon Coolscan V ED now) and experience with good scanning software (I use VueScan) produces excellent results and can be reasonably efficient. But it's never quick. Larger format film requires a much more expensive scanner and is significantly slower, if much higher resolution. I have never really needed the extreme resolution.

 

With the Sony A7 and then with the Leica M-P240 and SL I started switching over to camera copy instead of scanning larger formats. This proved so successful for medium format scanning, netting an excellent quality 16 Mpixel scan, such that I sold the Nikon Super Coolscan 9000. I then turned my attention to 35mm and found I could get consistent and fast results with that too once I improved my copy equipment (better copy stand, improved negative handling jig).

 

When I sold the SL, I thought long and hard about this and bought the CL body. It turns out the CL body is even easier to get quality digitizations of negatives using copy techniques than the SL ... the smaller format proves easier to work with, due to less optical magnification needed, and returns the same digital resolution.

 

So that's what I do now: I use the CL along with a Macro-Elmarit-R 60mm, Macro-Elmar-R 100mm, and Summicron-R 50mm lens kit on a Novoflex copy stand and focusing rail, a Leica Focusing Bellows-R, a flat panel light box, and my own design film handling jig. The setup can handle film formats from Minox (8x11mm) to 6x9 cm, and prints up to 8x12 inch (larger than that I switch to LED studio lights and a vertical capture jig). The raw exposures are processed in Lightroom; negatives processed using my own custom made camera calibration profile that does the image inversion for B&W and color negatives, which I then output to positive TIFF masters for finish rendering.

 

While I still have the Nikon Coolscan and Epson flatbed scanners, I haven't used them for the past year or two other than very occasionally. The quality and consistency of my digitization is now good enough, and it's much faster to setup and capture a hundred frames, probably by a factor of two or more. Once captured, I can process the frames either in batches quickly or one at a time at my leisure.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have had decent results with 6x6 negs using a Nikon DSLR on a Benbo tripod pointed down over a cheap slim LED light pad and some "museum glass" (which you can buy from any decent picture framing shop) to hold down the negs.  The museum glass is coated so you don't get problems with reflections and other aberrations.

 

I could do with a Macro lens or maybe extension tubes for 35mm film.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 years later...

I'm currently looking to do exactly the same with my Leica M10-P. I am considering buying either the Leica R 60mm 2.8 or the Leica R 100mm 4. I really can't test out the focal lengths. Any tips on which might be better to optimise the coverage of my M10 sensor? I'll be digitising 35mm & 120mm negatives.

 

Thanks,
Olivier

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, oliviersm said:

I'm currently looking to do exactly the same with my Leica M10-P. I am considering buying either the Leica R 60mm 2.8 or the Leica R 100mm 4. I really can't test out the focal lengths. Any tips on which might be better to optimise the coverage of my M10 sensor? I'll be digitising 35mm & 120mm negatives.

 

Thanks,
Olivier

 

Olivier,

As I have them for a while, some years ago, I managed to copy with them.

My conclusion is ( for my use of course) :

- 2.8/60mm is more manageable to use for slide copying with it's macro-adapter to reach 1:1

- 2.8/100mm Apo-Macro is a "bit" better but very heavy/large and even "better" flatter field with the Elpro to reach 1.1:1

as side note, I had also copied 24x65 Xpan negatives/slides, no need of Elpro,

 

so for usual copying 64/100 Iso slide, 60mm is good enough for 24Mpix, but with more pixels and less grainy film, I'd use the Apo 100mm

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Arnaud, the 60mm was what I was leaning towards, and now with your point on manageability, it's definitely the way to go for me. As hassle free as possible is important for me here. I was hoping to purchase the macro adapter for the M and then use that to attach my noctilux to my M10-P until I realised, that it's simply too close. I don't want to get stuck with stitching negatives together etc...

 

3 minutes ago, a.noctilux said:

Olivier,

As I have them for a while, some years ago, I managed to copy with them.

My conclusion is ( for my use of course) :

- 2.8/60mm is more manageable to use for slide copying with it's macro-adapter to reach 1:1

- 2.8/100mm Apo-Macro is a "bit" better but very heavy/large and even "better" flatter field with the Elpro to reach 1.1:1

as side note, I had also copied 24x65 Xpan negatives/slides, no need of Elpro,

 

so for usual copying 64/100 Iso slide, 60mm is good enough for 24Mpix, but with more pixels and less grainy film, I'd use the Apo 100mm

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hopefully, you don't use Noctilux for slide copying, it would be the worse choice.

Noctilux is a special lens corrected for far subjects and mainly for use in bad light at near wide open.

When I use (for fun)my 1/50 for copying or with macro-adapter, results are not as good as more modest lens like Summicron/Elmar.

With my Beoon, I use the modest LTM 3.5/50mm or Focotar 4.5/50mm enlarging lens with flat field and so small/light

have a look in this thread Beoon + M10

plus here

and many more (do search)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Am 12.9.2018 um 02:27 schrieb IkarusJohn:

Please excuse me if this has already been covered.  I did a search and couldn't find anything on topic.

 

I have about 30 years of slides and negatives, 135mm and 6x6 formats.  The results I'm getting from my Epson flatbed scanner and the 135mm scanner (I forget its name) are okay, but I'm wondering if I might get better results if I use my SL(601).  Is this correct?

 

Can anyone advise if this is worth doing, what I need equipment wise (presumably some sort of holder and a uniform whit background) and if it is feasible to photograph negatives as well as slides?

 

Or am I wasting my time?

 

Cheers

John

No, you are wasting your time when using a slow scanner.
But you need equipment:
• a filmholder a good and cheaper one: 
  Essential Film Holder: https://clifforth.co.uk.
  Or the deluxe with a Leica price: https://www.negative.supply    
  I have the essential film holder and i am happy with it. You can also use a negative carrier from an old enlarger.
• a lighttable or lightbox (coolest light as possible) between 5000K and 6000K.
• a blue compensationfilter 80a for "scanning" colornegatives.
• a reprostand or tripod.
• a macrolens or a bellow with enlarger lens.

For inverting i use the Plug In "Negmaster" for LR and PS https://negmaster.com
I tried color perfect, but find it handling very "nerdy" and old school. Then i tried Negativ Lab Pro and find it OK but not so good as Negmaster.
Negmaster has better color differentiation.
Once the set is rigged i shoot a 36er film in 15 min and need about an hour with converting in positives in LR and PS…
Retouching and other postwork on top…
I would never go back to scanning again. (And i worked as a drumscanner operator in filmdays ;) )
 

I forgot: For negatives it is importand to use a kind of light with continuous spectrum because the coupler in the emulsion are in such a narrow bandwith, that with gaps in the spectrum the results can be very dissapointing. An old colorhead from an enlarger can be used too. There you can put the cyanwheel in for compensating the orange mask.
I have no color enlarger so i use Yuji Leds with high CRI and which are tested TM-30-18:
https://store.yujiintl.com/products/standard-illuminant-cri-98-d50-5000k-mcpcb-led-module-iso-3664-2000-for-color-inspection?_pos=4&_sid=694e97bc0&_ss=r

some interesting stuff to read:
https://www.yujiintl.com/tm-30-18-high-fidelity-full-color-gamut-led-lighting.html

Edited by verwackelt
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.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By Stealth3kpl
      If you have one, why not try this?
      I'm slowly making my way through this YouTube page and it's very enjoyable.
      Pete
       
    • By gwpics
      I am just working through some transparency work and scanning it on to the computer. I was particularly pleased with this one which was taken in 1999 on Kodachrome 64 using a Leica M6. Scanning was with a Plustek 8200i, and post was with LT Classic.
      I think it is amazing how the work we have just put away into a filing cabinet etc. has stood the test of time, and before there is "ah, well it is Kodachrome" some Fuji Provia RDP is just as good.
      Gerry
       
       

      Hello guest! Please register or sign in to view the hidden content. Hallo Gast! Du willst die Bilder sehen? Einfach registrieren oder anmelden!
    • By Martin B
      Want to share my experience here to install two scanner related Silverfast 8 software packages on the same PC which allows to work with two scanners. I am currently using the Plustek 8200i scanner with Silverfast 8 Ai Suite and the Epson V850 with Silverfast 8 SE Suite. The start page of the software has a dropdown menu to select from multiple installed programs/scanners, but it is not straight forward to get there, and the current manual has nothing in there how to correctly install two or more Silverfast 8 versions for different scanners:

      1. Do not install Silverfast 8 from the CD - the versions are not the most actual ones, and you can only run Silverfast 8 for two (or more) scanners with exactly the same updated version. Do not try to install from the CD and do not use the update function within the program at this point - it won't work correctly and will only lead to hiccups with the other version.
      Also, you need to install both Silverfast 8 versions into the same hard drive directory to make them work in parallel.

      2. Download the most actual versions directly form the Silverfast home page. To do this, registration of the software is a requirement. After registration, you need to enter the provided serial number which came with the original CD of the program - do not lose this number! This allows you to get on the Silverfast website with downloadable software versions for the specific program version (for example SE Pro) which was purchased most likely in combination with the scanner. Download the latest version into a directory to install from on the hard drive. Repeat the whole process for the Silverfast version of the second scanner - register it also, enter its serial #, and download again the latest version - it must be the same version code as the first one! - of this specific Silverfast 8 version.

      3. Choose any of the two (or several) downloaded Silverfast 8 programs to be installed in a provided directory. After installation, select the other version to have it installed into the same directory as the earlier installed version. Then start the program with the provided Silverfast 8 desktop link - it will open the start page (assuming the scanner(s) are turned on) and have both scanners in the drop-down list to select from. After selection, the specific version of Silverfast 8 fitting to one of the scanners will start.

      4. Updates in the future. I didn't experience this myself yet, but I asked this question to the support team of Silverfast. Supposedly you can run from now on the internal update function which will now automatically recognize that two (or more) Silverfast versions were installed in the same directory. I was told that there is no need to download the latest upgraded version again directly from the homepage.
    • By schattenundlicht
      Hi!
       
      Today I received a batch of negatives which I had processed and scanned at a dedicated b/w lab. Usually I do the scanning myself, but this time I needed some quick results to check the technical validity of some vintage cameras and I had little spare time available. These scans are low res jpeg and only substitute for contacts. I am thinking of re-entering the dark abodes of home-developing, especially after reviewing the result that I want to query this forum about.
       
      Seven rolls of TriX, TMax and HP5 from diffeent cameras (M3, IIIf, M7) came out fine, but one roll of film (TMax) from a 1934 IID shows peculiar scratches not typical of ones that I have seen or produced myself before.
       
      Since this is the only roll of film from this newly acquired camera that I have available (it is currently away for a focusing CLA), I would be particularly interested in whether it is a problem that might be related to the camera or whether it is related to film handling pre/during/post development, which I find more likely. Since I bought the camera from a respected dealer, he should be noticed of any problems soon as possible.
       
      The scratches start at #25 and continue until #36A, where the scratch line tapers off into the perforation. It is not a strictly parallel scratch like ones I have seen from damaged back plates or sloppy enveloping/ rolling and it is not continuous for all the way.
       
      I will post three example images. I hope diagnosis can be made from forum resolution.
       
      (1): #29, Inadvertent picture of my lens cap (idiot me
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in to view the hidden content. Hallo Gast! Du willst die Bilder sehen? Einfach registrieren oder anmelden! ) (2): #32, Oyster bed, 300 million years old, today grounding a cottage, situated 600 Km from the nearest shoreline
      (3): #35, Casino, Wiesbaden, Germany
       
      Has anybody seen a scratch configuration like this before?
       
      Thanks!
       
      Kind regards, Mathias
       
      EDIT: By the way, the scratches are on the emulsion side.
    • By Martin B
      After digitizing for quite a while all my 35 mm negatives via photographing them with 1:1 macro lens, tripod, and LED light table, I decided now to get the plustek 8200i Ai scanner with SilverFast 8 software. Main reason for it was correct color calibration of color negatives. To do the color calibration manually in PS or LR is not always easy.
       
      Posting here to hear from others who use a plustek scanner with SilverFast software. So far I am very impressed by the scanner and the software. I updated to the SilverFast 8.8 version which has a lot of options - tricky part is to figure out what is mainly needed for a good color calibration of a scan and what is more optional. I prefer to use the internal settings for films to choose from - the color calibration of the scanned color negative appears fairly correct afterwards that only minimal adjustment is needed. I also like the infrared dust scan and automatic subtraction from the photo - it works really well and leaves other image parts intact.
       
      One thing I struggle with is the archive mode of the negative - the only option to save the file in RAW as DNG. I didn't find yet a way to get an automated color calibration after the negative was scanned with the archive mode. I would prefer to have the scan saved as DNG but would like to have it processed like it is offered for all the other image file modes as JPG, TIFF etc. Is there a way to do this easily?
       
      What is your best / most proficient workflow using plustek scanners and this software? Did you encounter any drawbacks?
×
×
  • Create New...