Jump to content
jonnyboy

Scanning 6X6 (Hasselblad)

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor einer Stunde schrieb Jossie:

Here is a description of a setup. Unfortunetely it is in German, but Google translate might help.

Hermann-Josef

This is a setup for slides. How should this work with negatives?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vor einer Stunde schrieb 250swb:

No wonder you say 'argh' with a non sequitur like that.....!

There are many ways to get the job done, but with scanning remember this, if you don't get the job done right in the first place you risk having to do it all over again when or if you find a better way. This is why any time you hear 'good enough for the internet' it is poor advice since scanning is time consuming whichever way it's done, and a little extra time doing a full resolution high quality scan on a good machine and saving this as a master file can lead to extra leeway in post processing, scans good enough for prints, and yes also with resizing scans for the internet. So time is valuable, don't use it up twice.

I think as a general advice this costs more time in the long run than necessary. You should optimise your workflow for that what you need 80-90% of the time. If your main goal is presenting images on the internet (some people do) and very rarely doing a print, then it's probably best to scan for internet resolution (much faster) and rescanning a handfull of images for print whenever you need it. I scan with 24MP although my camera is capable of a high-res shot with 96MP. That 24MP is enough for almost all of my printing needs. I needed this 96MP resolution so far for only 2 images. I don't want to store everything as a 96MP file just in case I need this once a year.

Same goes with tagging of images. When people start tagging their images in a software some of them invest an insane amout of time for precise tags. That will never pay off as saved time for searching.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, tom.w.bn said:

Same goes with tagging of images. When people start tagging their images in a software some of them invest an insane amout of time for precise tags. That will never pay off as saved time for searching.

I am tagging my images not for myself but for my children and grandchildren ... I still hope, my time is not wasted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, tom.w.bn said:

then it's probably best to scan for internet resolution (much faster) and rescanning a handfull of images for print whenever you need it.

I can't believe I need to say this but you are only supposed to scan the good ones at full resolution, just as nobody ever printed a 8x10 of every one of their film images, just as you only need to post process the good ones with a digital file. On a roll of 35mm film there will only be three or four 'good ones' at most, even for a very good photographer. 

Sure you can waste a lot of time if self editing is a problem, or kid yourself all the pictures are great, or plan to put all your bad ones on the internet as well as the good ones. But for most people two or three from a roll is plenty, and often too much because it's too easy to kid yourself something was worth scanning (or post processing) when in reality there is nothing, it was a wasted film and a wasted trip. Editing and honesty are the keys all good photographers have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, tom.w.bn said:

My V800 died a couple of months ago. Watched a lot of videos on Youtube about scanning with a digital camera. Tried it and like it very much. Very good quality and it's so much faster than a scanner. You need a bit more time converting images from raw-negativ to a positive though.

Scan with digital camera and scan with scanner has not the same principle :  CCD of scanner (like Epson)  doesn't have Bayer Filter with RGB pixels (lack of light on pixels only 25% for Red and Blue and 50% on Green) . If you like to scan with digital camera  (Cmos sensor) shoot directly with digital camera no film needed 

Rg 

Edited by Doc Henry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vor 3 Stunden schrieb 250swb:

I can't believe I need to say this but you are only supposed to scan the good ones at full resolution, just as nobody ever printed a 8x10 of every one of their film images, just as you only need to post process the good ones with a digital file. On a roll of 35mm film there will only be three or four 'good ones' at most, even for a very good photographer. 

Sure you can waste a lot of time if self editing is a problem, or kid yourself all the pictures are great, or plan to put all your bad ones on the internet as well as the good ones. But for most people two or three from a roll is plenty, and often too much because it's too easy to kid yourself something was worth scanning (or post processing) when in reality there is nothing, it was a wasted film and a wasted trip. Editing and honesty are the keys all good photographers have.

What? You start with "I can't believe..... you are only supposed to". You sound like a a grumpy old teacher no one listens to. Who are you to tell me what am I supposed to do? Really bad manners.

And btw. I gave no indication about the amount of scanning I do.

Edited by tom.w.bn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, tom.w.bn said:

You need a bit more time converting images from raw-negativ to a positive though.

Interestingly, I use Vuescan with my 16-year-old Epson 3200 - and one thing I love about it is that Vuescan will (optionally) output scans as .DNG files instead of ready-cooked TIFFS.

Which means I get all the controls of Adobe Camera Raw to adjust/open the files non-destructively. Fits right in with my M8/M9/M10/Monochrom work flows, and is much faster than Photoshop alone with a TIFF, since there are so many controls all in one module, where I can flip between them without "committing" to anything until all the parts are working well together (whites, highlights, shadows, blacks, sharpening (or not), curves, vignetting correction, lens correction - and with color films, saturation and WB and even the profile adjustments (reds more magenta or more yellow, as needed)). One-stop-shopping - without losing or modifying the full 16-bit file data. ;)

It has been an absolute revelation compared to years of having only the limited "sledgehammer" controls of the scanner software/operation itself - I'm getting the best scans of my life (and selling A2/17x22" prints from them).

I do agree with these points made previously:

- scan for fullest tonal range (no clipping) with otherwise minimal processing. In Ansel Adams' analogy, the negative - and the scan - should be the sheet-music, with the performance (the creative interpretation of the sheet music) being done in ACR and Photoshop.

- flatbeds just don't have the lens resolution of dedicated 35mm film scanners (I have a legacy Nikon 5000ED for my legacy 35mm-film scans). Doesn't matter how many ppi it says on the box - if the lens is throwing a fuzzy image, 1 million ppi won't improve things. My Epson will scan 3200 ppi - its lens is only good to about 2000 ppi (which is adequate for 6x6 and large-format).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, adan said:

and one thing I love about it is that Vuescan will (optionally) output scans as .DNG files instead of ready-cooked TIFFS.

If you save the scan as a "raw" image, the data in the TIF and in the DNG are the same! You can also open a raw TIF in Adobe's camera raw. So, what is your point here?

 

Edited by Jossie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I placed the negative against a white background on the ipad screen - is it better to use a proper light pad?

Edited by jonnyboy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, tom.w.bn said:

What? You start with "I can't believe..... you are only supposed to". You sound like a a grumpy old teacher no one listens to. Who are you to tell me what am I supposed to do? Really bad manners.

And btw. I gave no indication about the amount of scanning I do.

Yeah right, so you either spend your time scanning every image at low internet quality, or you spend all your time doing something else, which is it? You want to know what bad manners is, it's not pointing out it's not necessary to scan everything at full resolution, it's letting it go, it's allowing the fallacy of 'I don't have time to process everything' to be perpetuated because you don't need to process everything. And primarily it's not reminding people that the function of anybody who calls themselves a 'photographer' is they should edit their photographs before proceeding to scanning, printing, or post processing. Do you think it has been any other way for experienced photographers? Otherwise you effectively get the default slide show of 100+ images featuring your grandmas last two holidays with Christmas sandwiched inbetween, yeah.

And to also point out 'you' refers to you, me and anybody else reading this in an open forum and not necessarily you yourself, I'm talking to anybody who reads this as a person.

Edited by 250swb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jonnyboy said:

I placed the negative against a white background on the ipad screen - is it better to use a proper light pad?

Most definitely, yes. If you are using an Ipad the pixels could have an influence, and the light out of an ipad is probably neither strong enough nor properly color balanced. If you are going to go the camera based scanning route, it is best to have a dedicated setup. Find a larger light table if you can. I find that making a small support from a piece of glass helps keep the film flat and the surface clean. The acrylic that covers most light boxes scratches rather easily. If you are doing color and concerned about the color temperature, it is probably best to buy a piece of museum glass used for framing. Be careful though, it is generally not that thick. The other advantage to placing the film on glass is that it defocuses the background light, so it is more likely to be even. You should use a dedicated copy stand if you can, or be sure to have a sturdy tripod and self timer or remote release. Aim for a decently high shutter speed. If the E shutter in your camera does not cause problems with the light (sometimes fluorescent can flicker), that is probably best. If you are shooting color negative, the program ColorPerfect gives the best results I have seen for the negative conversion, though it can be a bit counter-intuitive to use. B&W is easy and just needs an inversion and conversion to grayscale (16 bit is best for editing).

I have both the V850 and the Hasselblad X5 in my studio. I use the V850 for 8x10, and do everything else in the X5. The Epson could be great, but it seems like a missed opportunity. I wish they would have left the low end to scanners like the V600 and then produced the V850 with a better lens, autofocus and better holders. Doing something like the XY scanning of the Kodak/Creo IQ Smart scanners would have been just what the doctor ordered. They can still give good results, but they could be so much better!

If you are an amateur, I would recommend a basic camera based setup for web use and general use, and you can talk to a higher end lab for scans if you need higher quality for larger prints or exhibitions etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Stuart Richardson said:

Most definitely, yes. If you are using an Ipad the pixels could have an influence, and the light out of an ipad is probably neither strong enough nor properly color balanced. If you are going to go the camera based scanning route, it is best to have a dedicated setup. Find a larger light table if you can. I find that making a small support from a piece of glass helps keep the film flat and the surface clean. The acrylic that covers most light boxes scratches rather easily. If you are doing color and concerned about the color temperature, it is probably best to buy a piece of museum glass used for framing. Be careful though, it is generally not that thick. The other advantage to placing the film on glass is that it defocuses the background light, so it is more likely to be even. You should use a dedicated copy stand if you can, or be sure to have a sturdy tripod and self timer or remote release. Aim for a decently high shutter speed. If the E shutter in your camera does not cause problems with the light (sometimes fluorescent can flicker), that is probably best. If you are shooting color negative, the program ColorPerfect gives the best results I have seen for the negative conversion, though it can be a bit counter-intuitive to use. B&W is easy and just needs an inversion and conversion to grayscale (16 bit is best for editing).

I have both the V850 and the Hasselblad X5 in my studio. I use the V850 for 8x10, and do everything else in the X5. The Epson could be great, but it seems like a missed opportunity. I wish they would have left the low end to scanners like the V600 and then produced the V850 with a better lens, autofocus and better holders. Doing something like the XY scanning of the Kodak/Creo IQ Smart scanners would have been just what the doctor ordered. They can still give good results, but they could be so much better!

If you are an amateur, I would recommend a basic camera based setup for web use and general use, and you can talk to a higher end lab for scans if you need higher quality for larger prints or exhibitions etc.

Yeah that's exactly what I thought, I can see the pixels of the ipad that;s why I;m not too pleased with the result. The resolution is okay I got a 4000x4000 image which is more than enough for me.
This seems a very interesting way to process C41 negatives: https://www.negativelabpro.com/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Stuart Richardson said:

I tried Negative Lab Pro and it is ok, but not nearly as good as ColorPerfect. Unfortunately ColorPerfect is very difficult to learn and use, so Negative Lab Pro is probably the better option for most people. 

Stuart if you like color and film as me develop yourself it's very easy and you have beautiful and natural color better than digital 

Rg  Henry 

Edited by Doc Henry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Henry,

I do develop film myself...I run a lab. Maybe I am missing something? Both ColorPerfect and Negative Lab Pro are software designed to give good color from positive scans or photos of C41 film...I do shoot C41 in 6x7 to 8x10, but prefer E6 if I am honest....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Stuart Richardson said:

Hi Henry,

I do develop film myself...I run a lab. Maybe I am missing something? Both ColorPerfect and Negative Lab Pro are software designed to give good color from positive scans or photos of C41 film...I do shoot C41 in 6x7 to 8x10, but prefer E6 if I am honest....

Yes it's a good  idea  !   Bravo Stuart 

....   almost all my film pictures don't need correction with any softwares and I am glad to have directly the color providing from film without any correction

Recently I changed my PC with Windows 10 (before I had Vista) and   I don't buy photo softwares anymore . What a relief
for morale and for the money 

Best  Henry 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Stuart Richardson said:

I tried Negative Lab Pro and it is ok, but not nearly as good as ColorPerfect. Unfortunately ColorPerfect is very difficult to learn and use, so Negative Lab Pro is probably the better option for most people. 

I will have to try them both. I'm not a Lightroom person myself and I'm not too keen in gettin into it but to be honest I never been to happy with the results I got from SilverFast? Maybe i never took too much time to fully understand the software. Im not a big fan of post editing either 😕

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately, I have you disagree with you Henry regarding film not needing any correction. I think it is not so much the film that is the problem, it is the ways that we make it into a digital file that are the issue. With E6 it is not so bad, as you have a slide that you can look at and see the proper colors as a reference. Scanners also have an easier time getting natural color out of slides. But for color negative there is no real "correct" image...it is always an interpretation of the scanned data. The difficulty with color negative is that while RA4 paper has been designed to render a good neutral baseline for the film, when you scan it, you have to account for the orange mask. Scanners and cameras have a much harder time of it, as they have not been designed to deal with it. A simple inversion of the negative will yield extremely blue/cyan images. While you can just try to compensate for it in photoshop, there is more going on than just white balance, so special software can help, be it the scanner software itself, or third party programs like I mentioned. In my experience, ColorPerfect gives the best baseline image in most cases. It is a bit counter-intuitive to use, but it seems to get the most natural colors in one click as compared to FlexColor (which I use in the X5), Negative Lab Pro (which I downloaded as a trial). I have not used Silverfast, EpsonScan or Vuescan extensively, but from what I hear from photographer's I trust, ColorPerfect gives the best result, despite the challenges of the workflow.

Share this post


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.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue., Read more about our Privacy Policy