@ratty, thanks for asking. It's a running series I have of some friends of mine from the local farmers market. They ply their verbiage for a few sheckels from the passersby.
I posted this here before, but it gives you some idea of the scene.
kwoodard wrote:
You know... Got that Coolscan sitting right here. Will even help you install on a Windows machine.
I might not need a film/negative scanner right now, but I could use a lesson or two in the negative scanning process/techniques and PP of scanned negatives.
Alpha_Geist wrote:
I might not need a film/negative scanner right now, but I could use a lesson or two in the negative scanning process/techniques and PP of scanned negatives.
I scan at the highest bit depth and resolution. Most everything else I have turned off. I scan everything in color (even b/w) and pull it into Lightroom. There I do the heavy lifting. I also sometimes pull it into Alien Exposure 7 for some tweaks.
Alpha_Geist wrote:
I might not need a film/negative scanner right now, but I could use a lesson or two in the negative scanning process/techniques and PP of scanned negatives.
Is an art in of itself. I use a Plustek 8100 for 35mm. And DSLR scan my medium format...I may say it can even beat the Nikon Coolscan in terms of details and resolution. Maybe not in the DR range. Is good enough for me that I am not planning to drop $3k for an obsolete Nikon medium format scanner..hahahahah....
PM me if you really want to learn how to DSLR scan your negatives.....Is more than slapping on few toilet paper rolls and point it toward any light source (ghetto). I can consistently produce very good scans/copies with my medium format negatives with over 6000 pixel resolution. So much so that I feel no need to shoot larger format. No need for a dedicated medium format scanner. I used to think that I want to shoot as larger the format as possible because my old Canon 9000f flatbed scanner won't struggle to capture all the details.
Here is one of the shots DSLR scanned at 6300x4500 resolution....you may notice some very minor, minor misalignment issues (like wires and small lines) due to CS6 having some issues merging the captures. It was captured in 3 sections.
Finally got to develop some film again tonight (first time in months)......fresh C-41 chemicals and 2 rolls of 35mm (Portra and Ektar) and 1 roll of Portra in 120...drying now for scanning tomorrow.
TooManyShots wrote:
Is an art in of itself. I use a Plustek 8100 for 35mm. And DSLR scan my medium format...I may say it can even beat the Nikon Coolscan in terms of details and resolution. Maybe not in the DR range. Is good enough for me that I am not planning to drop $3k for an obsolete Nikon medium format scanner..hahahahah....
PM me if you really want to learn how to DSLR scan your negatives.....Is more than slapping on few toilet paper rolls and point it toward any light source (ghetto). I can consistently produce very good scans/copies with my medium format negatives with over 6000 pixel resolution. So much so that I feel no need to shoot larger format. No need for a dedicated medium format scanner. I used to think that I want to shoot as larger the format as possible because my old Canon 9000f flatbed scanner won't struggle to capture all the details.
Here is one of the shots DSLR scanned at 6300x4500 resolution....you may notice some very minor, minor misalignment issues (like wires and small lines) due to CS6 having some issues merging the captures. It was captured in 3 sections.
TooManyShots wrote:
Is an art in of itself. I use a Plustek 8100 for 35mm. And DSLR scan my medium format...I may say it can even beat the Nikon Coolscan in terms of details and resolution. Maybe not in the DR range. Is good enough for me that I am not planning to drop $3k for an obsolete Nikon medium format scanner..hahahahah....
PM me if you really want to learn how to DSLR scan your negatives.....Is more than slapping on few toilet paper rolls and point it toward any light source (ghetto). I can consistently produce very good scans/copies with my medium format negatives with over 6000 pixel resolution. So much so that I feel no need to shoot larger format. No need for a dedicated medium format scanner. I used to think that I want to shoot as larger the format as possible because my old Canon 9000f flatbed scanner won't struggle to capture all the details.
Here is one of the shots DSLR scanned at 6300x4500 resolution....you may notice some very minor, minor misalignment issues (like wires and small lines) due to CS6 having some issues merging the captures. It was captured in 3 sections.
rattymouse wrote:
What camera are you using to do these "scans"?
Nikon D7000 with a Tamron 90mm sp f2.5, with an extension tube. I could get to 1 to 1 magnification ratio. Then, I would need to capture more sections and to merge them together. More sections mean greater resolution. The D7000 only has a 16 mp sensor. It would be great if I could use a 24mp body to scan so that I won't need to capture that many sections. Less work. At ISO100, the D7000 sensor has an effective DR of 10 stops.
You would want a flat field macro lens for the scan too.
BTW, this is a great video clip in how to scan your color negatives using the Plustek scanner. It could be with any scanners. The idea is the same. Profile your film using a piece of film strip in order to get the default, proper RGB and exposure settings of that particular film. Then, use ColorPerfect, a Photoshop plugin, to do the inversion.
TooManyShots wrote:
Nikon D7000 with a Tamron 90mm sp f2.5, with an extension tube. I could get to 1 to 1 magnification ratio. Then, I would need to capture more sections and to merge them together. More sections mean greater resolution. The D7000 only has a 16 mp sensor. It would be great if I could use a 24mp body to scan so that I won't need to capture that many sections. Less work. At ISO100, the D7000 sensor has an effective DR of 10 stops.
You would want a flat field macro lens for the scan too.
Would the Nikon 55mm f/2.8 AI-S macro lens be good enough to scan negatives with? If yes, then all I need to do is get a camera!
What do you use to hold the negatives and light them?
TooManyShots wrote:
BTW, this is a great video clip in how to scan your color negatives using the Plustek scanner. It could be with any scanners. The idea is the same. Profile your film using a piece of film strip in order to get the default, proper RGB and exposure settings of that particular film. Then, use ColorPerfect, a Photoshop plugin, to do the inversion.
ColorPerfect! That was the software I was trying to remember for Alpha_Geist. Takes all the guesswork out of adjusting color curves after scanning.
I use a cardboard box cutout (USPS priority mail shipping box) as a negative holder. I use 3M blue masking tape to tape the negative in place. The light source is a home deport flood light powering a 60w cfl blub. The lighting intensity is so much that I can get a proper exposure at iso 100, F6.3, 1/100s.
Since the film holder is a cardboard, it tends to wrap and bend. I then hot glued the holder with some bicycle wheel spokes.
With my old setup, I used a piece of anti reflective glass to hold the negatives. It was great because the negative is flat and all BUT the matted patterns causing my highlights blocking out. And they may have been accidentally capture and interfering with the grain patterns on the negative. I stopped mounting the film strip on the anti reflective glass since my last 2 scans. So far so good. And I keep the exposure setting not exceeding 1/3 of a stop. Keeping the exposure curve, more or less, in the middle.
Many thanks for your instruction and photos showing your set up. I'm in need of a scanner for 35mm and 120 negatives. I'm on the fence as to what I should buy. A good scanner costs around $1700 or more and is mono functional. If I could instead buy a DSLR, then I'd have a multi functional device. I dont know if "scanning" 35mm negatives the way you do is time efficient. 36 images seems like it would take a long time.
Still, I am intrigued by this. I'm wondering if you could post some "scans" to drop box for us to examine on our computers? Images that are worth "losing", nothing special or anything like that.
Again, a huge thanks for you taking the time to explain this to me. I'm sure I'm not the only one interested.
Tom,
I've considered a DSLR approach but settled on a good flatbed.
I use an Epson 4990, the predecessor to the v700 series.
They are maybe $300 max on Ebay & there are a few much less.
Now that the v800 series is out, the v700 series have dropped significantly
I have friends that get good results with v600 models too.
Used with BetterScanning holders, they are pretty easy to use.
I think you've seen my postings, the results are more than acceptable.
I do 35mm up to 4x5.
Not meant as a counter argument as I just consider these things just tools.
Many thanks for your instruction and photos showing your set up. I'm in need of a scanner for 35mm and 120 negatives. I'm on the fence as to what I should buy. A good scanner costs around $1700 or more and is mono functional. If I could instead buy a DSLR, then I'd have a multi functional device. I dont know if "scanning" 35mm negatives the way you do is time efficient. 36 images seems like it would take a long time.
Still, I am intrigued by this. I'm wondering if you could post some "scans" to drop box for us to examine on our computers? Images that are worth "losing", nothing special or anything like that.
Again, a huge thanks for you taking the time to explain this to me. I'm sure I'm not the only one interested.
For 35mm, dedicated scanner is the way to go and you can have one for as little as $200. The Plustek models are good.
I have uploaded my 3 recent shots here. You can download the original size in jpg here, click the down arrow icon by the right bottom of the photo...These were scanned without using the anti reflective glass. However, I didn't mod the film holder (with the current setup) back then and so you may notice certain blurriness by the edge of the scan at 100% crop. Maybe certain misalignments because of the CS5 photo merge issue.
I use a Plustek 8100 for 35mm. And DSLR scan my medium format...I may say it can even beat the Nikon Coolscan in terms of details and resolution. Maybe not in the DR range. Is good enough for me that I am not planning to drop $3k for an obsolete Nikon medium format scanner..hahahahah.... 
