This topic is in the 2023 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2023Recent Film Shots -- How are You Digitizing?
p.3 #1Recent Film Shots -- How are You Digitizing?
John Wolf wrote:
I make digital contact sheets on a Porta-Trace light table with my GR III and scan a few per roll based on those sheets.
Interesting. Would you be willing to share how you made digital contact sheets with Ricoh GRIII?
I make digital contact sheets on a Porta-Trace light table with my GR III and scan a few per roll based on those sheets.
Interesting. Would you be willing to share how you made digital contact sheets with Ricoh GRIII?
Dec 17, 2023 at 10:16 AM
p.3 #2Recent Film Shots -- How are You Digitizing?
Maybe I am doing something wrong?
I compared images scanned on my Nikon 9000 to the same ones digitized by my Sony A7R5 with the 90mm G Macro illuminated with a diffused strobe backlight.
The Nikon 9000 scans were an order of magnitude better. Better apparent resolution, vastly less dust showing, just a nicer file to work with. I think a good dedicated film scanner is just better if you can acquire one. If you are using some Epson flat bed scanner, well the bar is set much lower then and easier to match with a digital camera.
All macro lenses fall off into the corners to some degree at 1:1. A scanning array goes line by line for more uniform sharpness. It is tailored for the job.
With any set up, flatness is critical. I used a glass carrier for both approaches.
If only I could use dust removal ICE function on silver based real B&W film! I like the classic structure of conventional B&W grain but dust clean up is not fun on medium format scans.
I compared images scanned on my Nikon 9000 to the same ones digitized by my Sony A7R5 with the 90mm G Macro illuminated with a diffused strobe backlight.
The Nikon 9000 scans were an order of magnitude better. Better apparent resolution, vastly less dust showing, just a nicer file to work with. I think a good dedicated film scanner is just better if you can acquire one. If you are using some Epson flat bed scanner, well the bar is set much lower then and easier to match with a digital camera.
All macro lenses fall off into the corners to some degree at 1:1. A scanning array goes line by line for more uniform sharpness. It is tailored for the job.
With any set up, flatness is critical. I used a glass carrier for both approaches.
If only I could use dust removal ICE function on silver based real B&W film! I like the classic structure of conventional B&W grain but dust clean up is not fun on medium format scans.
Dec 17, 2023 at 12:02 PM
p.3 #3Recent Film Shots -- How are You Digitizing?
white wrote:
Maybe I am doing something wrong?
I compared images scanned on my Nikon 9000 to the same ones digitized by my Sony A7R5 with the 90mm G Macro illuminated with a diffused strobe backlight.
The Nikon 9000 scans were an order of magnitude better. Better apparent resolution, vastly less dust showing, just a nicer file to work with. I think a good dedicated film scanner is just better if you can acquire one. If you are using some Epson flat bed scanner, well the bar is set much lower then and easier to match with a digital camera.
All macro lenses fall off...Show more →
I look at 9000's from time to time. $2000+ for a complete setup right now on eBay. Can anyone actually service these things if something breaks?
Maybe I am doing something wrong?
I compared images scanned on my Nikon 9000 to the same ones digitized by my Sony A7R5 with the 90mm G Macro illuminated with a diffused strobe backlight.
The Nikon 9000 scans were an order of magnitude better. Better apparent resolution, vastly less dust showing, just a nicer file to work with. I think a good dedicated film scanner is just better if you can acquire one. If you are using some Epson flat bed scanner, well the bar is set much lower then and easier to match with a digital camera.
All macro lenses fall off...Show more →
I look at 9000's from time to time. $2000+ for a complete setup right now on eBay. Can anyone actually service these things if something breaks?
Dec 17, 2023 at 12:50 PM
p.3 #4Recent Film Shots -- How are You Digitizing?
white wrote:
Maybe I am doing something wrong?
I compared images scanned on my Nikon 9000 to the same ones digitized by my Sony A7R5 with the 90mm G Macro illuminated with a diffused strobe backlight.
The Nikon 9000 scans were an order of magnitude better. Better apparent resolution, vastly less dust showing, just a nicer file to work with. I think a good dedicated film scanner is just better if you can acquire one. If you are using some Epson flat bed scanner, well the bar is set much lower then and easier to match with a digital camera.
All macro lenses fall off...Show more →
It could be the glass carrier. It’s recommended to remove any filters from the lens which makes me wonder if the glass carrier was causing reflections. Another important factor is shielding the negative from extraneous light.
I use the FE90 2.8 Macro with a A7II and get good results.
Dec 17, 2023 at 01:00 PM
p.3 #5Recent Film Shots -- How are You Digitizing?
madNbad wrote:
I compared images scanned on my Nikon 9000 to the same ones digitized by my Sony A7R5 with the 90mm G Macro illuminated with a diffused strobe backlight.
The Nikon 9000 scans were an order of magnitude better. Better apparent resolution, vastly less dust showing, just a nicer file to work with. I think a good dedicated film scanner is just better if you can acquire one. If you are using some Epson flat bed scanner, well the bar is set much lower then and easier to match with a digital camera.
All macro lenses fall off into the corners to some degree at 1:1. A scanning array goes line by line for more uniform sharpness. It is tailored for the job.
With any set up, flatness is critical. I used a glass carrier for both approaches.
If only I could use dust removal ICE function on silver based real B&W film! I like the classic structure of conventional B&W grain but dust clean up is not fun on medium format scans.It could be the glass carrier. It’s recommended to remove any filters from the lens which makes me wonder if the glass carrier was causing reflections. Another important factor is shielding the negative from extraneous light.
I use the FE90 2.8 Macro with a A7II and get good results.
When you say good results; compared to what control. Have you had a good dedicated film scanner to compare too?
white wrote
Maybe I am doing something wrong?I compared images scanned on my Nikon 9000 to the same ones digitized by my Sony A7R5 with the 90mm G Macro illuminated with a diffused strobe backlight.
The Nikon 9000 scans were an order of magnitude better. Better apparent resolution, vastly less dust showing, just a nicer file to work with. I think a good dedicated film scanner is just better if you can acquire one. If you are using some Epson flat bed scanner, well the bar is set much lower then and easier to match with a digital camera.
All macro lenses fall off into the corners to some degree at 1:1. A scanning array goes line by line for more uniform sharpness. It is tailored for the job.
With any set up, flatness is critical. I used a glass carrier for both approaches.
If only I could use dust removal ICE function on silver based real B&W film! I like the classic structure of conventional B&W grain but dust clean up is not fun on medium format scans.
I use the FE90 2.8 Macro with a A7II and get good results.
When you say good results; compared to what control. Have you had a good dedicated film scanner to compare too?
Dec 17, 2023 at 01:05 PM
p.3 #6Recent Film Shots -- How are You Digitizing?
white wrote:
I compared images scanned on my Nikon 9000 to the same ones digitized by my Sony A7R5 with the 90mm G Macro illuminated with a diffused strobe backlight.
The Nikon 9000 scans were an order of magnitude better. Better apparent resolution, vastly less dust showing, just a nicer file to work with. I think a good dedicated film scanner is just better if you can acquire one. If you are using some Epson flat bed scanner, well the bar is set much lower then and easier to match with a digital camera.
All macro lenses fall off into the corners to some degree at 1:1. A scanning array goes line by line for more uniform sharpness. It is tailored for the job.
With any set up, flatness is critical. I used a glass carrier for both approaches.
If only I could use dust removal ICE function on silver based real B&W film! I like the classic structure of conventional B&W grain but dust clean up is not fun on medium format scans.It could be the glass carrier. It’s recommended to remove any filters from the lens which makes me wonder if the glass carrier was causing reflections. Another important factor is shielding the negative from extraneous light.
I use the FE90 2.8 Macro with a A7II and get good results.When you say good results; compared to what control. Have you had a good dedicated film scanner to compare too?
I had a Plustek 7600i a number of years ago. A fine but slow scanner and after experimenting with camera scanning, donated it to a local high school photography program. Many times, photography discussions revolve around resolution. How fine is the films grain, how many megapixels in the latest sensor, how sharp is the newest lens design? I've been involved with photography for years and always for my own enjoyment. I use film mostly because I always have used it and like the process. Camera scanning gives me a way to easily convert and share those images. Could my scans be sharper? Probably but like most of the images today, they're viewed on the internet on a variety of screens from phones to tablets to high resolution monitors. Since I'm not making prints for display and only for posting, I'm happy with my set up.
M4-2, Voigtlander 50 2.5 Color Skopar LTM, 022 filter, Tri-X @ ISO 200, FPP-76 1+1
Scanned with a Sony A7II, FE90 2.8 Macro, Negative Supply Pro Carrier 135, 5X7 Lightsource Pro 95 CRI, Negative Lab Pro
Edited on Dec 17, 2023 at 02:03 PM · View previous versions
madNbad wrote
white wrote
Maybe I am doing something wrong?I compared images scanned on my Nikon 9000 to the same ones digitized by my Sony A7R5 with the 90mm G Macro illuminated with a diffused strobe backlight.
The Nikon 9000 scans were an order of magnitude better. Better apparent resolution, vastly less dust showing, just a nicer file to work with. I think a good dedicated film scanner is just better if you can acquire one. If you are using some Epson flat bed scanner, well the bar is set much lower then and easier to match with a digital camera.
All macro lenses fall off into the corners to some degree at 1:1. A scanning array goes line by line for more uniform sharpness. It is tailored for the job.
With any set up, flatness is critical. I used a glass carrier for both approaches.
If only I could use dust removal ICE function on silver based real B&W film! I like the classic structure of conventional B&W grain but dust clean up is not fun on medium format scans.
I use the FE90 2.8 Macro with a A7II and get good results.
I had a Plustek 7600i a number of years ago. A fine but slow scanner and after experimenting with camera scanning, donated it to a local high school photography program. Many times, photography discussions revolve around resolution. How fine is the films grain, how many megapixels in the latest sensor, how sharp is the newest lens design? I've been involved with photography for years and always for my own enjoyment. I use film mostly because I always have used it and like the process. Camera scanning gives me a way to easily convert and share those images. Could my scans be sharper? Probably but like most of the images today, they're viewed on the internet on a variety of screens from phones to tablets to high resolution monitors. Since I'm not making prints for display and only for posting, I'm happy with my set up.
M4-2, Voigtlander 50 2.5 Color Skopar LTM, 022 filter, Tri-X @ ISO 200, FPP-76 1+1
Scanned with a Sony A7II, FE90 2.8 Macro, Negative Supply Pro Carrier 135, 5X7 Lightsource Pro 95 CRI, Negative Lab Pro
Edited on Dec 17, 2023 at 02:03 PM · View previous versions
Dec 17, 2023 at 01:58 PM
p.3 #7Recent Film Shots -- How are You Digitizing?
richyirich wrote:
Interesting. Would you be willing to share how you made digital contact sheets with Ricoh GRIII?
Pretty simple. I photograph the film in a Print File negative sheet on a light table. I lay a piece of glass over the sheet to flatten it.
Then import into Lightroom, invert using the Tone Curve function, and adjust as needed.
After that I add some nice header text in Photoshop. I rename the file in LR by date (20231217) and sort the folder by filename descending. The negatives sheets are stored in a binder by year, each labeled with the same date and stored in the same order.
The contact sheet quality is better if you photograph the negatives without the plastic negative page, but that's not worth the effort. They're good enough to identify candidates for scanning. Scanned negatives have the same filename as the sheet but with frame number added. (20231217_13).
John
Edited on Dec 17, 2023 at 03:28 PM · View previous versions
Interesting. Would you be willing to share how you made digital contact sheets with Ricoh GRIII?
Pretty simple. I photograph the film in a Print File negative sheet on a light table. I lay a piece of glass over the sheet to flatten it.
Then import into Lightroom, invert using the Tone Curve function, and adjust as needed.
After that I add some nice header text in Photoshop. I rename the file in LR by date (20231217) and sort the folder by filename descending. The negatives sheets are stored in a binder by year, each labeled with the same date and stored in the same order.
The contact sheet quality is better if you photograph the negatives without the plastic negative page, but that's not worth the effort. They're good enough to identify candidates for scanning. Scanned negatives have the same filename as the sheet but with frame number added. (20231217_13).
John
Edited on Dec 17, 2023 at 03:28 PM · View previous versions
Dec 17, 2023 at 01:59 PM
p.3 #8Recent Film Shots -- How are You Digitizing?
"I had a Plustek 7600i a number of years ago. A fine but slow scanner and after experimenting with camera scanning, donated it to a local high school photography program. Many times, photography discussions revolve around resolution. How fine is the films grain, how many megapixels in the latest sensor, how sharp is the newest lens design? I've been involved with photography for years and always for my own enjoyment. I use film mostly because I always have used it and like the process. Camera scanning gives me a way to easily convert and share those images. Could my scans be sharper? Probably but like most of the images today, they're viewed on the internet on a variety of screens from phones to tablets to high resolution monitors. Since I'm not making prints for display and only for posting, I'm happy with my set up."
Good answer.
You have identified what your personal goals are.
Dec 17, 2023 at 03:25 PM
p.3 #9Recent Film Shots -- How are You Digitizing?
white wrote:
"I had a Plustek 7600i a number of years ago. A fine but slow scanner and after experimenting with camera scanning, donated it to a local high school photography program. Many times, photography discussions revolve around resolution. How fine is the films grain, how many megapixels in the latest sensor, how sharp is the newest lens design? I've been involved with photography for years and always for my own enjoyment. I use film mostly because I always have used it and like the process. Camera scanning gives me a way to easily convert and share those images. Could my scans...Show more →
Staying with one film and developer combination. I made the move to just using Tri-X almost two years ago. I worked my way through a bottle of Rodinal and learned a lot about dilution and even more about the effects of agitation. Currently, I'm working my way through a batch of the Film Photography Project's D-76 clone, FPP-76. I like the look from 1+1. Next up is Xtol. I'm hoping Adox starts shipping XT-3 to the U.S. more often. Five liters of Xtol is a lot and Adox offers the XT-3 in one liter bags. The main scanning goal is making as few changes as possible in post processing. Once I've set the exposure and don't have to move a slider, I consider that a successful scan. I use a Sekonic 308 in incident mode and haven't used a film camera with a built in meter since 2018. I try to be careful with my metering and even more so about checking my settings before pressing the shutter release. I had been using an inexpensive conversion software, which worked ok but making the change to Negative Lab Pro really was a a big step up.
I'm also only using 135 and will stay with it. I have owned both medium and large format cameras in the past but have no place to put in a darkroom and get the most out of those negatives. I'm not a pro, just some guy having fun.
"I had a Plustek 7600i a number of years ago. A fine but slow scanner and after experimenting with camera scanning, donated it to a local high school photography program. Many times, photography discussions revolve around resolution. How fine is the films grain, how many megapixels in the latest sensor, how sharp is the newest lens design? I've been involved with photography for years and always for my own enjoyment. I use film mostly because I always have used it and like the process. Camera scanning gives me a way to easily convert and share those images. Could my scans...Show more →
Staying with one film and developer combination. I made the move to just using Tri-X almost two years ago. I worked my way through a bottle of Rodinal and learned a lot about dilution and even more about the effects of agitation. Currently, I'm working my way through a batch of the Film Photography Project's D-76 clone, FPP-76. I like the look from 1+1. Next up is Xtol. I'm hoping Adox starts shipping XT-3 to the U.S. more often. Five liters of Xtol is a lot and Adox offers the XT-3 in one liter bags. The main scanning goal is making as few changes as possible in post processing. Once I've set the exposure and don't have to move a slider, I consider that a successful scan. I use a Sekonic 308 in incident mode and haven't used a film camera with a built in meter since 2018. I try to be careful with my metering and even more so about checking my settings before pressing the shutter release. I had been using an inexpensive conversion software, which worked ok but making the change to Negative Lab Pro really was a a big step up.
I'm also only using 135 and will stay with it. I have owned both medium and large format cameras in the past but have no place to put in a darkroom and get the most out of those negatives. I'm not a pro, just some guy having fun.
Dec 17, 2023 at 04:20 PM
p.3 #10Recent Film Shots -- How are You Digitizing?
madNbad wrote:
M4-2, Voigtlander 50 2.5 Color Skopar LTM, 022 filter, Tri-X @ ISO 200, FPP-76 1+1
Scanned with a Sony A7II, FE90 2.8 Macro, Negative Supply Pro Carrier 135, 5X7 Lightsource Pro 95 CRI, Negative Lab Pro
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53331057836_45efa38543_b.jpg
Thank you for putting all of the relevant camera/lens/emulsion/exposure/scanning information in your post! I wish everyone did that.
M4-2, Voigtlander 50 2.5 Color Skopar LTM, 022 filter, Tri-X @ ISO 200, FPP-76 1+1
Scanned with a Sony A7II, FE90 2.8 Macro, Negative Supply Pro Carrier 135, 5X7 Lightsource Pro 95 CRI, Negative Lab Pro
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53331057836_45efa38543_b.jpg
Thank you for putting all of the relevant camera/lens/emulsion/exposure/scanning information in your post! I wish everyone did that.
Dec 18, 2023 at 08:05 AM
p.3 #11Recent Film Shots -- How are You Digitizing?
I only shoot b/w roll film and am seriously looking into camera scanning for 6x6 format. How important is the conversion software? I understand for color negatives there’s the orange base and the negative lab plug in or similar software is necessary. For b/w would inverting the scan in Photoshop just as good or would a dedicated software is also recommended for b/w? Thanks in advance.
Dec 25, 2023 at 10:20 AM
p.3 #12Recent Film Shots -- How are You Digitizing?
madNbad wrote:
Good answer.
You have identified what your personal goals are.Staying with one film and developer combination. I made the move to just using Tri-X almost two years ago. I worked my way through a bottle of Rodinal and learned a lot about dilution and even more about the effects of agitation. Currently, I'm working my way through a batch of the Film Photography Project's D-76 clone, FPP-76. I like the look from 1+1. Next up is Xtol. I'm hoping Adox starts shipping XT-3 to the U.S. more often. Five liters of Xtol is a lot and Adox offers the XT-3 in one liter bags. The main scanning goal is...Show more →
I don't get this comment. You are developing 135 film. Developing 120 film is simply changing the reel's size to accept 120 film. Otherwise it's all the same. Scanning 120 film is WAAAY easier than 135 and the quality differnece is HUGE.
white wrote
"I had a Plustek 7600i a number of years ago. A fine but slow scanner and after experimenting with camera scanning, donated it to a local high school photography program. Many times, photography discussions revolve around resolution. How fine is the films grain, how many megapixels in the latest sensor, how sharp is the newest lens design? I've been involved with photography for years and always for my own enjoyment. I use film mostly because I always have used it and like the process. Camera scanning gives me a way to easily convert and share those images. Could my scans be sharper? Probably but like most of the images today, they're viewed on the internet on a variety of screens from phones to tablets to high resolution monitors. Since I'm not making prints for display and only for posting, I'm happy with my set up."Good answer.
You have identified what your personal goals are.
I don't get this comment. You are developing 135 film. Developing 120 film is simply changing the reel's size to accept 120 film. Otherwise it's all the same. Scanning 120 film is WAAAY easier than 135 and the quality differnece is HUGE.
Dec 25, 2023 at 11:03 AM
p.3 #13Recent Film Shots -- How are You Digitizing?
OffTrail wrote:
I compared images scanned on my Nikon 9000 to the same ones digitized by my Sony A7R5 with the 90mm G Macro illuminated with a diffused strobe backlight.
The Nikon 9000 scans were an order of magnitude better. Better apparent resolution, vastly less dust showing, just a nicer file to work with. I think a good dedicated film scanner is just better if you can acquire one. If you are using some Epson flat bed scanner, well the bar is set much lower then and easier to match with a digital camera.
All macro lenses fall off into the corners to some degree at 1:1. A scanning array goes line by line for more uniform sharpness. It is tailored for the job.
With any set up, flatness is critical. I used a glass carrier for both approaches.
If only I could use dust removal ICE function on silver based real B&W film! I like the classic structure of conventional B&W grain but dust clean up is not fun on medium format scans.I look at 9000's from time to time. $2000+ for a complete setup right now on eBay. Can anyone actually service these things if something breaks?
Doubtful. Those Nikon's are ancient.
white wrote
Maybe I am doing something wrong?I compared images scanned on my Nikon 9000 to the same ones digitized by my Sony A7R5 with the 90mm G Macro illuminated with a diffused strobe backlight.
The Nikon 9000 scans were an order of magnitude better. Better apparent resolution, vastly less dust showing, just a nicer file to work with. I think a good dedicated film scanner is just better if you can acquire one. If you are using some Epson flat bed scanner, well the bar is set much lower then and easier to match with a digital camera.
All macro lenses fall off into the corners to some degree at 1:1. A scanning array goes line by line for more uniform sharpness. It is tailored for the job.
With any set up, flatness is critical. I used a glass carrier for both approaches.
If only I could use dust removal ICE function on silver based real B&W film! I like the classic structure of conventional B&W grain but dust clean up is not fun on medium format scans.
Doubtful. Those Nikon's are ancient.
Dec 25, 2023 at 11:04 AM
p.3 #14Recent Film Shots -- How are You Digitizing?
hkrazerx wrote:
I only shoot b/w roll film and am seriously looking into camera scanning for 6x6 format. How important is the conversion software? I understand for color negatives there’s the orange base and the negative lab plug in or similar software is necessary. For b/w would inverting the scan in Photoshop just as good or would a dedicated software is also recommended for b/w? Thanks in advance.
I just inverted b/w in PS and adjusted in LR for years. It's definitely an adequate option.
That said, since I got Negative Lab Pro for color negs, I do all my b/w conversions with it too. It has a lot of intuitive, film specific adjustments and presets, etc. that speed up processing, at least for me.
Pretty sure there is a free trail option for NLP so you can evaluate yourself.
I only shoot b/w roll film and am seriously looking into camera scanning for 6x6 format. How important is the conversion software? I understand for color negatives there’s the orange base and the negative lab plug in or similar software is necessary. For b/w would inverting the scan in Photoshop just as good or would a dedicated software is also recommended for b/w? Thanks in advance.
I just inverted b/w in PS and adjusted in LR for years. It's definitely an adequate option.
That said, since I got Negative Lab Pro for color negs, I do all my b/w conversions with it too. It has a lot of intuitive, film specific adjustments and presets, etc. that speed up processing, at least for me.
Pretty sure there is a free trail option for NLP so you can evaluate yourself.
Dec 25, 2023 at 12:04 PM
p.3 #15Recent Film Shots -- How are You Digitizing?
hkrazerx wrote:
I only shoot b/w roll film and am seriously looking into camera scanning for 6x6 format. How important is the conversion software? I understand for color negatives there’s the orange base and the negative lab plug in or similar software is necessary. For b/w would inverting the scan in Photoshop just as good or would a dedicated software is also recommended for b/w? Thanks in advance.
I think that marketing plays a large part in convincing people how necessary it is to subscribe to PL or LR. Adobe's business model is pay to play and if you're on Win or Mac then you're definitely in a pay to play ecosystem where just about every bit of software is subscription based.
I quit using Windows with XP just because I got tired of paying $80 every time I needed to update software to perform a necessary task. I've been Windows free on Linux since the XP era and I haven't paid a dime for software since the turn of the century. I've been getting by exclusively on free (as in beer) software.
If that interests you, there are some cross-platform open source options for image conversion. One is imagemagik, which is software specifically designed for image manipulation. It allows you to perform image adjustments from the command line. Flipping a negative to a positive is as simple as a command line instruction to "invert" that will batch process every image in a folder. Then you can import the positive output files into whatever processing software you like to use to fine tune them. You'll have to do manual dust removal, but the process is easy.
Another option is Darktable, which is another free/open source program that is GUI based. It includes a negative flipping module that works incredibly well. I gave it a run for the first time this week, processing a roll of film from the mid-1980s. By simply clicking on a blank space on the emulsion it calculated what color changes needed to be made to compensate for the color shifts while inverting and automatically implemented them. The amount of processing that I had to do was absolutely trivial -- I just added a stop of exposure. I found that invaluable because I absolutely hate working in the digital darkroom. Once I had done the scans and negative conversion, and adjusted exposure, I had to spend a little time using the heal tool to clean up dust on the negative, but on my first try I was able to get excellent results where I couldn't even tell that I had been working with a 40 year old negative.
As far as capture goes, If you're reading this thread then you know I've started doing camera captures with a Nikon D810 and a 60mm Micro f.2.8 lens. The system works well enough that I'm getting all of the detail that the film is able to provide in the 35mm format. I haven't tried 120 yet. I don't know what's necessary to capture all of the detail from medium format, and I wonder what most people are using to digitize 120.
I only shoot b/w roll film and am seriously looking into camera scanning for 6x6 format. How important is the conversion software? I understand for color negatives there’s the orange base and the negative lab plug in or similar software is necessary. For b/w would inverting the scan in Photoshop just as good or would a dedicated software is also recommended for b/w? Thanks in advance.
I think that marketing plays a large part in convincing people how necessary it is to subscribe to PL or LR. Adobe's business model is pay to play and if you're on Win or Mac then you're definitely in a pay to play ecosystem where just about every bit of software is subscription based.
I quit using Windows with XP just because I got tired of paying $80 every time I needed to update software to perform a necessary task. I've been Windows free on Linux since the XP era and I haven't paid a dime for software since the turn of the century. I've been getting by exclusively on free (as in beer) software.
If that interests you, there are some cross-platform open source options for image conversion. One is imagemagik, which is software specifically designed for image manipulation. It allows you to perform image adjustments from the command line. Flipping a negative to a positive is as simple as a command line instruction to "invert" that will batch process every image in a folder. Then you can import the positive output files into whatever processing software you like to use to fine tune them. You'll have to do manual dust removal, but the process is easy.
Another option is Darktable, which is another free/open source program that is GUI based. It includes a negative flipping module that works incredibly well. I gave it a run for the first time this week, processing a roll of film from the mid-1980s. By simply clicking on a blank space on the emulsion it calculated what color changes needed to be made to compensate for the color shifts while inverting and automatically implemented them. The amount of processing that I had to do was absolutely trivial -- I just added a stop of exposure. I found that invaluable because I absolutely hate working in the digital darkroom. Once I had done the scans and negative conversion, and adjusted exposure, I had to spend a little time using the heal tool to clean up dust on the negative, but on my first try I was able to get excellent results where I couldn't even tell that I had been working with a 40 year old negative.
As far as capture goes, If you're reading this thread then you know I've started doing camera captures with a Nikon D810 and a 60mm Micro f.2.8 lens. The system works well enough that I'm getting all of the detail that the film is able to provide in the 35mm format. I haven't tried 120 yet. I don't know what's necessary to capture all of the detail from medium format, and I wonder what most people are using to digitize 120.
Dec 25, 2023 at 12:30 PM
p.3 #16Recent Film Shots -- How are You Digitizing?
OregonSun wrote:
I just inverted b/w in PS and adjusted in LR for years. It's definitely an adequate option.
That said, since I got Negative Lab Pro for color negs, I do all my b/w conversions with it too. It has a lot of intuitive, film specific adjustments and presets, etc. that speed up processing, at least for me.
Pretty sure there is a free trail option for NLP so you can evaluate yourself.
That’s perfect you have done it extensively both ways. You wrote the PS/LR method is an adequate option. Would NLP be a superior option in your opinion? I suppose I should just spend the money just that I frown on the subscription model.
Edited on Dec 25, 2023 at 02:27 PM · View previous versions
hkrazerx wrote
I only shoot b/w roll film and am seriously looking into camera scanning for 6x6 format. How important is the conversion software? I understand for color negatives there’s the orange base and the negative lab plug in or similar software is necessary. For b/w would inverting the scan in Photoshop just as good or would a dedicated software is also recommended for b/w? Thanks in advance.That said, since I got Negative Lab Pro for color negs, I do all my b/w conversions with it too. It has a lot of intuitive, film specific adjustments and presets, etc. that speed up processing, at least for me.
Pretty sure there is a free trail option for NLP so you can evaluate yourself.
That’s perfect you have done it extensively both ways. You wrote the PS/LR method is an adequate option. Would NLP be a superior option in your opinion? I suppose I should just spend the money just that I frown on the subscription model.
Edited on Dec 25, 2023 at 02:27 PM · View previous versions
Dec 25, 2023 at 02:17 PM
p.3 #17Recent Film Shots -- How are You Digitizing?
coralnut wrote:
I think that marketing plays a large part in convincing people how necessary it is to subscribe to PL or LR. Adobe's business model is pay to play and if you're on Win or Mac then you're definitely in a pay to play ecosystem where just about every bit of software is subscription based.
I quit using Windows with XP just because I got tired of paying $80 every time I needed to update software to perform a necessary task. I've been Windows free on Linux since the XP era and I haven't paid a dime for software since the turn...Show more →
I am not so keen on the subscription model myself but Lr and PS are such powerful tools I stopped resisting. Also Apple computers don’t last forever and with each OS update older software don’t work. I had kept my CD copies of Adobe programs for a long time. I still have a working LS5000ED film scanner so have 135 format taken care of. For 120 and bigger I need to find another solution.
hkrazerx wrote
I only shoot b/w roll film and am seriously looking into camera scanning for 6x6 format. How important is the conversion software? I understand for color negatives there’s the orange base and the negative lab plug in or similar software is necessary. For b/w would inverting the scan in Photoshop just as good or would a dedicated software is also recommended for b/w? Thanks in advance.I quit using Windows with XP just because I got tired of paying $80 every time I needed to update software to perform a necessary task. I've been Windows free on Linux since the XP era and I haven't paid a dime for software since the turn...Show more →
I am not so keen on the subscription model myself but Lr and PS are such powerful tools I stopped resisting. Also Apple computers don’t last forever and with each OS update older software don’t work. I had kept my CD copies of Adobe programs for a long time. I still have a working LS5000ED film scanner so have 135 format taken care of. For 120 and bigger I need to find another solution.
Dec 25, 2023 at 02:26 PM
p.3 #18Recent Film Shots -- How are You Digitizing?
hkrazerx wrote:
I just inverted b/w in PS and adjusted in LR for years. It's definitely an adequate option.
That said, since I got Negative Lab Pro for color negs, I do all my b/w conversions with it too. It has a lot of intuitive, film specific adjustments and presets, etc. that speed up processing, at least for me.
Pretty sure there is a free trail option for NLP so you can evaluate yourself.That’s perfect you have done it extensively both ways. You wrote the PS and LR method is an adequate option. Would NLP be a superior option in your opinion?
For several years I used RAW Power by Gentlemen Coders for my B&W conversions. It worked well but I really wanted to try NLP. I paid for a Lightroom subscription and purchased NLP. The difference was immediate. With NLP, converting an entire roll of B&W to positives takes seconds and still leaves the option of making adjustments to individual images. Much like camera scanning speeds up the capture, NLP does the same for conversion.
OregonSun wrote
hkrazerx wrote
I only shoot b/w roll film and am seriously looking into camera scanning for 6x6 format. How important is the conversion software? I understand for color negatives there’s the orange base and the negative lab plug in or similar software is necessary. For b/w would inverting the scan in Photoshop just as good or would a dedicated software is also recommended for b/w? Thanks in advance.That said, since I got Negative Lab Pro for color negs, I do all my b/w conversions with it too. It has a lot of intuitive, film specific adjustments and presets, etc. that speed up processing, at least for me.
Pretty sure there is a free trail option for NLP so you can evaluate yourself.
For several years I used RAW Power by Gentlemen Coders for my B&W conversions. It worked well but I really wanted to try NLP. I paid for a Lightroom subscription and purchased NLP. The difference was immediate. With NLP, converting an entire roll of B&W to positives takes seconds and still leaves the option of making adjustments to individual images. Much like camera scanning speeds up the capture, NLP does the same for conversion.
Dec 25, 2023 at 02:39 PM
p.3 #19Recent Film Shots -- How are You Digitizing?
That’s what I needed to know. I’ll get the program. I have enough unscanned negatives to make it worthwhile.
Dec 25, 2023 at 02:50 PM
p.3 #20Recent Film Shots -- How are You Digitizing?
coralnut wrote:
I think that marketing plays a large part in convincing people how necessary it is to subscribe to PL or LR. Adobe's business model is pay to play and if you're on Win or Mac then you're definitely in a pay to play ecosystem where just about every bit of software is subscription based.
I quit using Windows with XP just because I got tired of paying $80 every time I needed to update software to perform a necessary task. I've been Windows free on Linux since the XP era and I haven't paid a dime for software since the turn...Show more →
Screw Adobe. I've been using LR5 for more years than I can remember. It's easy to get running on Mac's that are not supported. Every month, $10 NOT in Adobe's pocket from me. For some reason I never got around to LR6; can't remember why. Other than that I upgraded every time. I will NEVER rent software.
hkrazerx wrote
I only shoot b/w roll film and am seriously looking into camera scanning for 6x6 format. How important is the conversion software? I understand for color negatives there’s the orange base and the negative lab plug in or similar software is necessary. For b/w would inverting the scan in Photoshop just as good or would a dedicated software is also recommended for b/w? Thanks in advance.I quit using Windows with XP just because I got tired of paying $80 every time I needed to update software to perform a necessary task. I've been Windows free on Linux since the XP era and I haven't paid a dime for software since the turn...Show more →
Screw Adobe. I've been using LR5 for more years than I can remember. It's easy to get running on Mac's that are not supported. Every month, $10 NOT in Adobe's pocket from me. For some reason I never got around to LR6; can't remember why. Other than that I upgraded every time. I will NEVER rent software.
Dec 25, 2023 at 02:56 PM