you probably dont care but does anybody know a trick to get back into an Instagram account? I stupidly forgot the password. I love any tips you can give me.
When you cropped the scan in Lightroom, you effectively reduced the resolution of the final image. Try to fill the frame with the negative when youre capturing the image on your DSLR. You will be much more pleased with the end result :)
I scan my negatives with a dslr and negative lab pro. Especially on darker images make shure that you haven't got a vingiette ir an uneven lightsource. Because when you convert the image into positives, your going to get a bright, white vingiette. Also make shure to block all the acces light around the filmstock so it doesnt cause light leaks into your camera, thus creating, again, uneven vingiettes. In my experience, the brighter the lightsource, the better. Hope ur dooing save!
Just watched the guy who cut a hole in his table and put a strobe light source underneath and spent what appears to be a shit ton of money on digital levels and mounts and film carriers and got massively discouraged. Then I saw you have bought the same cheap arsed stuff as me and decided that your results are far better than what I would personally deem acceptable. Despair to joy in two videos. Scanning negs takes FOREVER!!! I need to scan quick to see what is worth re-scanning to a high quality. Enthused I shall proceed with my setup. Thanks a lot, this was just the thing I needed⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
My preferred workflow is the Epson V550, the Epson 2 software (the new version that scans much faster) and the Negative Lab Pro plugin for Lr. You scan your negatives as colour positives with no adjustment settings in Epson 2 and bring the scans into Lightroom. You make sure you scan the black borders which become white since you scan it as a colour positive. You set the white balance in Lr on the black border which is currently white, you then do the reversal using Negative Lab Pro with one click (no messing around with tone curves needed) and do whatever adjustments you want to do and voila! Looks better than most lab scans. You would be surprised. You can try Negative Lab Pro with a free trial and compare scans to the one you got from a lab. You might very well be surprised at the results. The software is not expensive. Doesn't cost more than a few rolls of portra and makes the end results of much higher quality, especially when it comes to color
Good info-didn’t know about pulling the Pt Curves to the edges of the histogram. With Negative Lab Pro, processing is so much quicker. Tip for dust-scan in your bathroom but run the shower on hot for a few minutes; the moisture will settle the dust.
Some tips: Mask off the areas not in the frame, especially if you're scanning color. I just use black craft paper. And try to make the room as dark as you can. For fast editing Negative Lab Pro is great. You can select all your images and convert them all at once. It also makes converting color negative so much easier and the photos look amazing.
With a macro lens, you could have gotten so much closer to the negative. Remember, 1:1 reproduction is achieved at minimum focusing distance. In theory you could reproduce the entire negative onto a full-frame digital sensor without needing to crop afterwards. Your ‘scan’ result could have been much sharper, had you not left that much excess space in the scan-image.
@@xesse1 hey! Wanting to gather knowledge isn’t stupid at all. 1:1 magnification means that the subject you’re photographing is projected onto the sensor as large as it is in reality. So when your subject is 1cm long, it’s projected image from the lens is 1cm long. Some lenses photograph 2:1, so they can magnify that same subject to project a 2cm image onto the sensor. In this case, scanning film with a full-frame camera: because a 35mm frame is just about the same size as a full-frame digital sensor, you could get the entire 35mm frame to fit the entire image on the digital camera. And because you’re filling the entire image, you’re getting more detail.
@@HesselFolkertsma Thanks so much for the information man, really appreciate that. So I’ll be using a canon m50 with a Minolta 100mm macro lens. I’ll be digitising 120 (6x7) negatives, would this work?
@@xesse1 definitely. You’ve got two options. 1) capture the entire frame in one shot, you won’t need to focus at the minimum focus distance and won’t be at 1:1 magnification. Use this for images that aren’t as important. 2) you can capture the film at 1:1 but in multiple shots, each time a different portion of the image. Afterwards you’ll have to stitch the images together in Photoshop. This will give you the absolute highest resolution ‘scan’. Use this when you want to maybe print the image, especially at larger sizes.
I went straight into this process when I started shooting film about 7 months ago and 2 recommendations. Do it in complete darkness as any other light can mess with your scan or even make it slightly foggy and the other is negative lab pro makes it a dream to convert and is really easy and quick to use for amazing results. Personally I enjoy the process of scanning them this way and getting to view my negs up close... I don't know something about it. Great video bro!
You could get a closer minimum focus distance, a tighter crop in camera and therefore more resolution, if you used either an extra macro adapter or a longer lens. I use a Mikro Nikkor 105mm with two macro adapters on my APS sensor camera and manage to use pretty much the whole sensor that way. Scanning is much faster than with a flatbed, processing takes much more time, though.
I don't know if you'll see this or not. But if you go to Epson's website, you can get silverfast for free for the v550/600. I did this since my computer doesn't have the OS to run Epson scan 2. Combine that with negative lab pro and you've got a really good combo. I'm still working on getting the colors right. But this has definitely made a difference. Much better than the standard Epson scan software.
Hi, i also have a v550. I ve used to compare the two software scans, epson and silverfast. I tend to see more sharpness in the epson scan, colors are way better in the vuescan one. You know how to adjust sharpness in silverfast? How is your process?
@@DuhamelTanguy I haven't had it that long. But if you go to the unsharp masking section, you can adjust the strength of the autosharpening or make a custom setting. I'm an amateur with scanning because I can never nail the colors 100%. But this way has helped. I scan my negatives as a positive. Photo quality 1 (300 ppi) at 1600 dpi. Then use negative lab pro to invert the colors. They seem to be about the same to me. The benefit of silverfast vs. Epson scan is the speed.
I've started "scanning" my negatives with my phone (Oneplus6) and my computer monitor as the light table. I also 3D printed a negative holder to hold the film since I didnt have one. I got surprisingly good results. But I have a clip on lens coming to get a bit better resolution since the negative is only about 1/4 of the frame right now. When this social distancing thing is over I'll compare the results with a dedicated film scanner my friend has.
This has been really insightful for me. I've been shooting film for around a year now, but it's costing me alot of money to have negatives scanned and Into prints etc and I can't afford my own scanner yet, but I already own everything I need for this method so I'm really going to give this a try at least for the short term and see how I get on. Thanks for doing this man!
Good video. I scan with my DSLR and it works great. B&W only.... I haven't tackled color. A couple hints: Get your camera perfectly squared up parallel with the film plane. Being off by even the tiniest amount would lead to one end or the other being out-of-focus. You can check if you're perfectly parallel by placing a small mirror on your light box first and looking at it in Live View. You'll want to get it exactly centered on the center spot. Also, raise up your negative holder a little from the light box. Some light boxes have pixels (or something?) that can create a pattern visible in the finished picture. Raising the negative a little eliminates all that. And it makes dust on the light surface disappear too. Perhaps place a film canister cap at each corner of the negative holder. Also, be sure to fill the frame with the picture. No sense cropping away part of the sensor's capabilities. Some people use 60 or 90 or 105mm macros for this purpose; I suppose it depends if you're shooting with a full-frame or APS-C digital which lens would be better.
I just ordered an Epson Perfection V550 and I finally made the transition to film (I was really debating if I should sell my Canon 1200D for a scanner and decided to do it). I wasn't happy with digital, I got annoyed because of dust or with the camera's limits, whereas with film, I didn't complain about getting completely blurry images from my grandpa's camera. A couple of months of film later, I bought a Minolta X-500 for 35mm and Yashica-Mat LM for 120 + the scanner and I am really happy! Keep up with the good work! :)
One other thing to think about is whether you want to do one photo of each negative or do multiple photos stitched together to give you a higher resolution “scan”.
NICE! I've been digitizing with my DSLR for a while now & the only thing I'd recommend is to use a lens hood if possible & you MUST mask off the remaining area of the backlight. If you have the backlight shining through any area that isn't where you're intending to scan it will reduce the contrast of your final image, introduce"fog" especially near the edges, & may even alter the colors of color negs. Same concept with shooting with super hard backlighting. 👍🏻 Love the channel, keep it up man.
The only advice that I have for you you probably figured out by now since this was your first time of doing it: do it in a darker room close all the curtains turn off all the lights except for the light box and you'll get better results. If you noticed on a couple of that black and white scans you had some light seepage. If you turn out all the lights and make it as a darker room you should have better results. But good job
when your focusing on the 35mm film with your camera, do you use zoom? I'm having a really hard time get the a full frame of the slide on my sony a7iii. im using a macro lens too 1.4 50mm.
This is the digital scanning process that finally clicks with me. Just making sure my histograms are not cut off and I've already made a preset for the tone curve! Just needs small tweaks between each photo. #minoltagang
got the light table, got the holder, got the stand, and then i tried it out and my pentax 70mm (supposedly) macro lens cannot focus anyway near close enough... its even mounted on a APS-C 1.6x crop sensor :( pls help
Thanks for sharing! :) Instead of that dedicated light table you can also use a pocket rgb video light, which might be useful in other situations as well. I am using a f7 for this purpose and I am pretty happy with the results. If you are afraid of seeing the single leds on the photograph, just put another diffusing layer between the rgb light and the film. Regards from Germany!
Good vid man. I use negative lab pro with a traditional film scanner - a Plustek 8100. Process is using vuescan to get the raw file then NLP with Lightroom to convert and color. Negative lab pro is quite worth the money. It takes a lot of the guesswork out of getting good colors. I have a Sony a6500 and have thought about picking up a macro lens to compare but honestly saves me quite a bit of money home scanning. I would recommend picking it up and giving it a shot to use with your epson or Sony. I’ve done some tests and it’s pretty spot on with lab colors with a few minor tweaks (as expected)
but exposing negetives to the light directly ? that will ruin the negetives right ? I am confused ... as everyone is saying " open the back lid of the film camera during photoshoot will ruin everything AS BECAUSE OF THE DIRECT LIGHT " then how this will work ?
My concern with this approach has always been colors being reinterpreted through a second lens and a sensor. I suppose if you're editing the colors afterwards you can correct it to some extent but I do wonder about having to fight color shifts. Also I wonder about the best combination of focal length and minimal focusing distance to maximize the image size on the sensor and lose as little resolution as possible when cropping. I might be overthinking it, though :P
The bigger issue is the CRI of the light table you use. Something like an iPad, iPhone, or Samsung phone or higher end tablet end up being better than most cheap light tables because of the color calibration of the screen and the higher directionality of the light because of the resolution of the screen. You do want to elevate it from the screen though so that you don't get the pixel lines from the screen in the scan. You're also better off using something a little longer with a 1:1 reproduction so you can fill the whole sensor with the frame. I use my FE 85 1.8 with an extension tube with pretty decent results, and end up with a 24mp image.
Just a thought, I'm a little concerned that without masking that there is a lot of stray light bouncing around that could back illuminate the negatives. IMO, only the negative that you want should be visible and the other light locked out. Do you think this would make a difference?
Hi there. I just bought my first film camera and I have a digital camera with a basic lense. I know it is not the ideal setup but for now I'll make it work. My question is do I need a special folder or something to put the film in before placing it on the light table or just got the film out of the camera and place it there?
I love your videos. Since I've started following you, I've purchased a Canon A-1, AE-1 Program, and a Canonet QL17III and bunch of FD lenses. For the past few months I've been on the fence deciding between getting a scanner or using my DSLR. I already have a 100mm macro and want to try using what I already have. Do you have a link for that light table you used?
I’m glad I found your video. I’m just starting out scanning some 5000 slides and negatives and the DSLR route seems the way to go. One thing I noticed on your setup is that you didn’t mask off the unused portion of the light table. Do you think light from around the carrier might be degrading the image a bit?
I have been off and on scanning with my Canon flatbed and my Xt3. The details are a “little better” with my Xt3 and it’s quick to scan, but like you said the post work is a little much at times. Also the time it takes to setup my tripod and camera, camera settings, Tripod height, leveling etc... I have three boys under 7 years old, so time is precious haha. I may stick to the quality of my Canon flatbed 🤪 Thanks for taking the time to create these videos ✌🏼
ryan ogawa Same here! It takes forever to setup . I scan with my epson on low dpi and jpeg as a preview/ contact sheet. Anything worth showing or printing I scan with my mirrorless. I got 4 girls.
Amazing content man, have been a couple of weeks seeing your videos. I would like to know your opinion on extension tubes as a cheap option for macro lenses for scanning film. thank you
I'd love to be able to scan my negatives this way, but since I don't have a light table, or a tripod or a macro lense, I'll go for the cheaper option and choose the Epson (as soon as the lockdown is over!) One thing you didn't mention is the file size. Since you scan with a 24Mpx camera you get a much bigger scan of your negative which can be very helpful if you to intend to print afterwards (espacially if you want to go big)
I made a post about this a long time ago that has gotten a ridiculous amount of views, and I'm still a firm believer. I'm glad you're investigating it! Negative Lab Pro is a really nice tool, though I've gotten pretty good at editing colors accurately on my own after all these years. And yes, the dust editing thing is something people are still working on ... Keeping a clean table and scanning ASAP definitely helps. Thanks for sharing!
These aren't really my best videos anymore, but the information still stands pretty accurately! th-cam.com/play/PLrCzfXJaBhpC62t8UHnSIyGsK8WArNo2Q.html
Consider the concept of 1:1 macro on a full frame DSLR. At 1:1 you should be able to get close enough to have the film negative fill the entire frame and still get minimum focus distance to work. I scan mine in with a 1:1 90mm on a D800 and I get the camera as close to the negative as physically possible. Much higher quality final product.
IMO the scan looks better/sharper. But i know the frustration and time that goes into using the scanner. I would use digital camera for non critical work/save time, scanner for critical. I think the digital could look better if a different lens was used?
I tried a v500 vs an A7RIII with a 90mm 1:1 macro and the scanner was a lot softer. Maybe a v600 would've been sharper, but for my specific case, no point in using this scanner at the moment.
I just bought an old macro bellows to use with my vintage Minolta lenses on my x pro 2 body so I can do this. I prefer scanning medium and large format film with the epson, but 35mm is much faster and better (for me, anyway) with the camera style of digitizing. Gives me something to do while we’re all trapped inside, lol
great video again man, ive got a question if you dont mind; say im shooting 200 speed film and im following the sunny 16 rule... I have my asa set to 200, my shutter at 1/250 and my aperture F8, F11 for sunny day. If i want to still overexpose my film would I simply change my ASA to 100 and shoot as normal? thankyou
I recently learned that Silverfast is available for free for Epson v550 and V600. I only use it for color scans though due to the preset that it have. It is amazing. Maybe you can looking into that for your Epson
Flatbed is not that great for 35mm film. You could consider getting some ANR glass and that would help but for 35mm film you should consider a real film scanner (I have the Pacific Image Prime Film XA). I started using a workflow of scanning RAW images with Vuescan and converting using ColorPerfect. The results I get with CP are much better than what I get from the lab. Silverfast also does a great job (crop within the borders though) if you want to just take care of everything in the scanner software. I don't know all the science behind it but there is a reason film scanners (including those nice Epson flat beds) use CCD sensors. The CCD sensor is supposed to give better results over CMOS when it comes to scanning film. I will say though that if you nail the DLSR process you can quickly get some proofs which could help you decide which images you want to scan at a higher resolution.
The main issue with this workflow is it is only optimised for 135 film shooters. For 120 or large format shooters, basically you should ignore it entirely unless you want to do crazy image stitching or have your (larger than 135 size) negative cropped to below digital full frame resolution.
in my experience you are going to get better results in total darkness, with gaffers tape on the light table surrounding the negative if possible. if you don't do that you will get a halo effect that lowers contrast. something that is overlooked almost everywhere on TH-cam; maximize your quality and your time and get an extension tube!!?! fill as much of the digital frame as possible... the math can be tricky but i use the hard to find Pentax HELOCOID extension tube and the 100mm macro. as close to total frame coverage as possible is what you want. the last thing i would suggest is turning an old enlarger into a copy stand, it's easy to adapt a quick release onto an old enlarger. please don't encourage your subs to cannibalize nice enlargers though, some of us still use them!?! literally any strurdy old enlarger will do... the one i have can be easily converted to digitize or back to making prints by removing the light table and reattaching the old head. comparatively verses the tripod, it allows for height adjustment only... but if you need to shoot medium format just pick up a height adjustable tripod head to attach to your quick release. this concept using the enlarger took me months, but it works and it was fun to build. you're welcome. #themoreyouknow
I switched over to mirrorless camera from my Epson v850. So much faster and sharper to use . I bought a plug in for Lightroom that when you import them it will convert them from a negative. Super worth having that price of software cause you can batch process them into Lightroom.
You should bring photoshop instead of lightroom into the mix... cmd+i will invert the image in .3 seconds, then you can either choose to do the rest of the edits in ps or send it to lightroom...(I'd do in photoshop it is faster and easier.....only problem is working with lot of files, but if you are doing a roll at a time it wouldn't take much time)
My dude! For anyone using Lightroom: build presets for your most commonly used types of film, and set those presets to apply on import. Presets applied on import is what's going to save you time on the back end!
As a rule, the speed (sensitivity) of the film halves every ten years. So, for example, if the speed on the box is 200 ASA and the film is ten years old, then set the exposure meter to 100 ASA. If the film is 20 years old, then meter at 50 ASA. If the film has been stored in a freezer, then the rate of deterioration is less.
Damn, so jealous to be able to thrift a brand new, in box macro lens. Here in Australia that would be extremely difficult to pull off. Nothing analog usually around
I think scanning is better because of all that dust you mentioned. But If you have extra Money for a software Like negative lab pro or so you can adjust the colors from the beginning in the right Direction without manipuliate the colors afterwards. Thanks for the Video 👍
Trying this dslr scanning thing but i always get some pixels of my lightsource in my scans.. i just can precisely focus at the grain i think. Even if i get it as precise i can, i still see some lines / forms of pixels..:-( i also tried lifting the negative from just laying on the lightpad.. anyone suggetions how to get this sorted?
I’m really hooked on your content. Simple, engaging and informative and as someone who has just come back to film it’s one of my go to channels. So thank you.
I 'm no photographer but I understand some film shooter shoots film because of the look that is very different from bayer filter look. So why then subjecting your film to the bayer filter interpolation instead of buying or using affordable full rgb color dedicated scanner.
Great video! I've had a bias against dslr scanning bc everyone I know that did it wouldn't focus or color correct 😂 this definitely changes my perspective 👍 Also I would suggest testing out capture one for sony, I've had issuess with color and sharpness rendering with lightroom for sony & Fuji.
Sad to say that with the Coronavirus, the upcoming months are going to be hard for small businesses especially for film photo labs. Scanning film at home/diy may become more commonplace if labs close.
![Scanning without a Scanner: Digitizing Your Film [with a DSLR]](/img/n.gif)
Interesting first experience! Thanks for tuning in 🤘🏼🔥
Bro a7 ii or a7 iii , which do you recommend?
Iam just look for a stills medium format .
Have you tried using your phone as the camera? ( maybe with a clip on lens to get the camera to focus a bit nearer to the phone)
you probably dont care but does anybody know a trick to get back into an Instagram account?
I stupidly forgot the password. I love any tips you can give me.
@Leonardo Beau Instablaster ;)
When you cropped the scan in Lightroom, you effectively reduced the resolution of the final image. Try to fill the frame with the negative when youre capturing the image on your DSLR. You will be much more pleased with the end result :)
I scan my negatives with a dslr and negative lab pro. Especially on darker images make shure that you haven't got a vingiette ir an uneven lightsource. Because when you convert the image into positives, your going to get a bright, white vingiette. Also make shure to block all the acces light around the filmstock so it doesnt cause light leaks into your camera, thus creating, again, uneven vingiettes. In my experience, the brighter the lightsource, the better. Hope ur dooing save!
Tha part of Tone Curve adjustments was missing in my life. Will try this trick asap. Thanks.
I usually used plugins for the color conversion, but the way you do it adjusting those cure gives me a much better result, so THANK YOU SO MUCH !!
That technique for converting it to the positive blew my mind! its like a magic trick
Just watched the guy who cut a hole in his table and put a strobe light source underneath and spent what appears to be a shit ton of money on digital levels and mounts and film carriers and got massively discouraged. Then I saw you have bought the same cheap arsed stuff as me and decided that your results are far better than what I would personally deem acceptable. Despair to joy in two videos. Scanning negs takes FOREVER!!! I need to scan quick to see what is worth re-scanning to a high quality. Enthused I shall proceed with my setup. Thanks a lot, this was just the thing I needed⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
My preferred workflow is the Epson V550, the Epson 2 software (the new version that scans much faster) and the Negative Lab Pro plugin for Lr. You scan your negatives as colour positives with no adjustment settings in Epson 2 and bring the scans into Lightroom. You make sure you scan the black borders which become white since you scan it as a colour positive. You set the white balance in Lr on the black border which is currently white, you then do the reversal using Negative Lab Pro with one click (no messing around with tone curves needed) and do whatever adjustments you want to do and voila! Looks better than most lab scans. You would be surprised. You can try Negative Lab Pro with a free trial and compare scans to the one you got from a lab. You might very well be surprised at the results. The software is not expensive. Doesn't cost more than a few rolls of portra and makes the end results of much higher quality, especially when it comes to color
Good info-didn’t know about pulling the Pt Curves to the edges of the histogram. With Negative Lab Pro, processing is so much quicker.
Tip for dust-scan in your bathroom but run the shower on hot for a few minutes; the moisture will settle the dust.
I have a horrible time with dust, especially after development. Gonna give this a try - thank you sir!
Some tips: Mask off the areas not in the frame, especially if you're scanning color. I just use black craft paper. And try to make the room as dark as you can. For fast editing Negative Lab Pro is great. You can select all your images and convert them all at once. It also makes converting color negative so much easier and the photos look amazing.
With a macro lens, you could have gotten so much closer to the negative. Remember, 1:1 reproduction is achieved at minimum focusing distance. In theory you could reproduce the entire negative onto a full-frame digital sensor without needing to crop afterwards. Your ‘scan’ result could have been much sharper, had you not left that much excess space in the scan-image.
This is going to sound stupid probably, but I keep seeing 1:1 macro around, what does it mean?
@@xesse1 hey! Wanting to gather knowledge isn’t stupid at all. 1:1 magnification means that the subject you’re photographing is projected onto the sensor as large as it is in reality. So when your subject is 1cm long, it’s projected image from the lens is 1cm long. Some lenses photograph 2:1, so they can magnify that same subject to project a 2cm image onto the sensor.
In this case, scanning film with a full-frame camera: because a 35mm frame is just about the same size as a full-frame digital sensor, you could get the entire 35mm frame to fit the entire image on the digital camera. And because you’re filling the entire image, you’re getting more detail.
@@HesselFolkertsma Thanks so much for the information man, really appreciate that. So I’ll be using a canon m50 with a Minolta 100mm macro lens. I’ll be digitising 120 (6x7) negatives, would this work?
@@xesse1 definitely. You’ve got two options.
1) capture the entire frame in one shot, you won’t need to focus at the minimum focus distance and won’t be at 1:1 magnification. Use this for images that aren’t as important.
2) you can capture the film at 1:1 but in multiple shots, each time a different portion of the image. Afterwards you’ll have to stitch the images together in Photoshop. This will give you the absolute highest resolution ‘scan’. Use this when you want to maybe print the image, especially at larger sizes.
@@xesse1 helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/using/create-panoramic-images-photomerge.html
I went straight into this process when I started shooting film about 7 months ago and 2 recommendations. Do it in complete darkness as any other light can mess with your scan or even make it slightly foggy and the other is negative lab pro makes it a dream to convert and is really easy and quick to use for amazing results. Personally I enjoy the process of scanning them this way and getting to view my negs up close... I don't know something about it. Great video bro!
Which lens did you use? What’s best lens to use on Sony a7riv for scanning 35mm film?
You could get a closer minimum focus distance, a tighter crop in camera and therefore more resolution, if you used either an extra macro adapter or a longer lens. I use a Mikro Nikkor 105mm with two macro adapters on my APS sensor camera and manage to use pretty much the whole sensor that way. Scanning is much faster than with a flatbed, processing takes much more time, though.
Isn't the 105 a 1:1 lens already without adapters?
I don't know if you'll see this or not. But if you go to Epson's website, you can get silverfast for free for the v550/600. I did this since my computer doesn't have the OS to run Epson scan 2. Combine that with negative lab pro and you've got a really good combo. I'm still working on getting the colors right. But this has definitely made a difference. Much better than the standard Epson scan software.
Hi, i also have a v550. I ve used to compare the two software scans, epson and silverfast. I tend to see more sharpness in the epson scan, colors are way better in the vuescan one. You know how to adjust sharpness in silverfast? How is your process?
@@DuhamelTanguy I haven't had it that long. But if you go to the unsharp masking section, you can adjust the strength of the autosharpening or make a custom setting. I'm an amateur with scanning because I can never nail the colors 100%. But this way has helped. I scan my negatives as a positive. Photo quality 1 (300 ppi) at 1600 dpi. Then use negative lab pro to invert the colors. They seem to be about the same to me. The benefit of silverfast vs. Epson scan is the speed.
I've started "scanning" my negatives with my phone (Oneplus6) and my computer monitor as the light table. I also 3D printed a negative holder to hold the film since I didnt have one. I got surprisingly good results. But I have a clip on lens coming to get a bit better resolution since the negative is only about 1/4 of the frame right now. When this social distancing thing is over I'll compare the results with a dedicated film scanner my friend has.
This has been really insightful for me. I've been shooting film for around a year now, but it's costing me alot of money to have negatives scanned and Into prints etc and I can't afford my own scanner yet, but I already own everything I need for this method so I'm really going to give this a try at least for the short term and see how I get on. Thanks for doing this man!
Good video. I scan with my DSLR and it works great. B&W only.... I haven't tackled color.
A couple hints: Get your camera perfectly squared up parallel with the film plane. Being off by even the tiniest amount would lead to one end or the other being out-of-focus. You can check if you're perfectly parallel by placing a small mirror on your light box first and looking at it in Live View. You'll want to get it exactly centered on the center spot.
Also, raise up your negative holder a little from the light box. Some light boxes have pixels (or something?) that can create a pattern visible in the finished picture. Raising the negative a little eliminates all that. And it makes dust on the light surface disappear too. Perhaps place a film canister cap at each corner of the negative holder.
Also, be sure to fill the frame with the picture. No sense cropping away part of the sensor's capabilities. Some people use 60 or 90 or 105mm macros for this purpose; I suppose it depends if you're shooting with a full-frame or APS-C digital which lens would be better.
I just ordered an Epson Perfection V550 and I finally made the transition to film (I was really debating if I should sell my Canon 1200D for a scanner and decided to do it).
I wasn't happy with digital, I got annoyed because of dust or with the camera's limits, whereas with film, I didn't complain about getting completely blurry images from my grandpa's camera.
A couple of months of film later, I bought a Minolta X-500 for 35mm and Yashica-Mat LM for 120 + the scanner and I am really happy!
Keep up with the good work! :)
I guess it was the kit lense that came with 1200D that was too "slow", if You google for "fast" lenses.
When are you going to get a battery for that smoke alarm 🤣🤣🤣
One other thing to think about is whether you want to do one photo of each negative or do multiple photos stitched together to give you a higher resolution “scan”.
NICE! I've been digitizing with my DSLR for a while now & the only thing I'd recommend is to use a lens hood if possible & you MUST mask off the remaining area of the backlight. If you have the backlight shining through any area that isn't where you're intending to scan it will reduce the contrast of your final image, introduce"fog" especially near the edges, & may even alter the colors of color negs. Same concept with shooting with super hard backlighting. 👍🏻 Love the channel, keep it up man.
The only advice that I have for you you probably figured out by now since this was your first time of doing it: do it in a darker room close all the curtains turn off all the lights except for the light box and you'll get better results. If you noticed on a couple of that black and white scans you had some light seepage. If you turn out all the lights and make it as a darker room you should have better results. But good job
Negative lab pro seems to significantly cut down post processing time? Any thoughts? It’s basically 2 clicks to a final image. Not bad.
when your focusing on the 35mm film with your camera, do you use zoom? I'm having a really hard time get the a full frame of the slide on my sony a7iii. im using a macro lens too 1.4 50mm.
This is the digital scanning process that finally clicks with me. Just making sure my histograms are not cut off and I've already made a preset for the tone curve! Just needs small tweaks between each photo.
#minoltagang
Dope. I’ve heard of this process but never gave it any thought. Think I might try it myself as I have most of the tools needed. Thanks
got the light table, got the holder, got the stand, and then i tried it out and my pentax 70mm (supposedly) macro lens cannot focus anyway near close enough... its even mounted on a APS-C 1.6x crop sensor :( pls help
What's the brand/page of the actual light table you bought?
Thanks for sharing! :)
Instead of that dedicated light table you can also use a pocket rgb video light, which might be useful in other situations as well. I am using a f7 for this purpose and I am pretty happy with the results. If you are afraid of seeing the single leds on the photograph, just put another diffusing layer between the rgb light and the film. Regards from Germany!
Honestly love this channel
Good vid man. I use negative lab pro with a traditional film scanner - a Plustek 8100. Process is using vuescan to get the raw file then NLP with Lightroom to convert and color. Negative lab pro is quite worth the money. It takes a lot of the guesswork out of getting good colors. I have a Sony a6500 and have thought about picking up a macro lens to compare but honestly saves me quite a bit of money home scanning. I would recommend picking it up and giving it a shot to use with your epson or Sony. I’ve done some tests and it’s pretty spot on with lab colors with a few minor tweaks (as expected)
but exposing negetives to the light directly ?
that will ruin the negetives right ?
I am confused ... as everyone is saying " open the back lid of the film camera during photoshoot will ruin everything AS BECAUSE OF THE DIRECT LIGHT "
then how this will work ?
My concern with this approach has always been colors being reinterpreted through a second lens and a sensor. I suppose if you're editing the colors afterwards you can correct it to some extent but I do wonder about having to fight color shifts. Also I wonder about the best combination of focal length and minimal focusing distance to maximize the image size on the sensor and lose as little resolution as possible when cropping. I might be overthinking it, though :P
The bigger issue is the CRI of the light table you use. Something like an iPad, iPhone, or Samsung phone or higher end tablet end up being better than most cheap light tables because of the color calibration of the screen and the higher directionality of the light because of the resolution of the screen. You do want to elevate it from the screen though so that you don't get the pixel lines from the screen in the scan.
You're also better off using something a little longer with a 1:1 reproduction so you can fill the whole sensor with the frame. I use my FE 85 1.8 with an extension tube with pretty decent results, and end up with a 24mp image.
Are you not adding more noise from the camera than a scanner? I don't know how much noise a scanner produces on top but is that a factor at all?
Just a thought, I'm a little concerned that without masking that there is a lot of stray light bouncing around that could back illuminate the negatives. IMO, only the negative that you want should be visible and the other light locked out. Do you think this would make a difference?
Hi there. I just bought my first film camera and I have a digital camera with a basic lense. I know it is not the ideal setup but for now I'll make it work. My question is do I need a special folder or something to put the film in before placing it on the light table or just got the film out of the camera and place it there?
I love your videos. Since I've started following you, I've purchased a Canon A-1, AE-1 Program, and a Canonet QL17III and bunch of FD lenses. For the past few months I've been on the fence deciding between getting a scanner or using my DSLR. I already have a 100mm macro and want to try using what I already have. Do you have a link for that light table you used?
do you think using a t3i with a 52m lens would be good enough.
Can I use the kit lens or a 50mm lens for Sony a7iii or do I really need a micro lens??
I’m glad I found your video. I’m just starting out scanning some 5000 slides and negatives and the DSLR route seems the way to go. One thing I noticed on your setup is that you didn’t mask off the unused portion of the light table. Do you think light from around the carrier might be degrading the image a bit?
Great video! I was looking to do this with a 50mm lens though I'm not sure if it is possible. Does anyone know if it is?
I have been off and on scanning with my Canon flatbed and my Xt3. The details are a “little better” with my Xt3 and it’s quick to scan, but like you said the post work is a little much at times. Also the time it takes to setup my tripod and camera, camera settings, Tripod height, leveling etc...
I have three boys under 7 years old, so time is precious haha. I may stick to the quality of my Canon flatbed 🤪
Thanks for taking the time to create these videos ✌🏼
ryan ogawa Same here! It takes forever to setup . I scan with my epson on low dpi and jpeg as a preview/ contact sheet. Anything worth showing or printing I scan with my mirrorless. I got 4 girls.
Amazing content man, have been a couple of weeks seeing your videos. I would like to know your opinion on extension tubes as a cheap option for macro lenses for scanning film. thank you
I'd love to be able to scan my negatives this way, but since I don't have a light table, or a tripod or a macro lense, I'll go for the cheaper option and choose the Epson (as soon as the lockdown is over!)
One thing you didn't mention is the file size. Since you scan with a 24Mpx camera you get a much bigger scan of your negative which can be very helpful if you to intend to print afterwards (espacially if you want to go big)
I made a post about this a long time ago that has gotten a ridiculous amount of views, and I'm still a firm believer. I'm glad you're investigating it! Negative Lab Pro is a really nice tool, though I've gotten pretty good at editing colors accurately on my own after all these years. And yes, the dust editing thing is something people are still working on ... Keeping a clean table and scanning ASAP definitely helps. Thanks for sharing!
These aren't really my best videos anymore, but the information still stands pretty accurately! th-cam.com/play/PLrCzfXJaBhpC62t8UHnSIyGsK8WArNo2Q.html
Can you link the light table you bought? Btw love the video! Very inspired by your work📸
careful of the cheaper ones. depending on your shutter speed a lot of times you can see the individual lights in them.
I have spare laptop displays. Now i know wat to do with them - I will tinker light panel form them. There are instructions in TH-cam how to do it.
Hey bro! Could you link the light table? Thanks!
Try negative lab pro and you should safe some hours on both ways ✌🏼
just bought and its amazing!
Did you notice a big sharpness difference for MF scan vs photo?
I already have a plustek for 35, but I feel that the scans lack dynamic range...
You can take multiple photos and stitch them together for insane resolution if you need it.
Consider the concept of 1:1 macro on a full frame DSLR. At 1:1 you should be able to get close enough to have the film negative fill the entire frame and still get minimum focus distance to work. I scan mine in with a 1:1 90mm on a D800 and I get the camera as close to the negative as physically possible. Much higher quality final product.
what lightable did you use?_?
IMO the scan looks better/sharper. But i know the frustration and time that goes into using the scanner. I would use digital camera for non critical work/save time, scanner for critical.
I think the digital could look better if a different lens was used?
I tried a v500 vs an A7RIII with a 90mm 1:1 macro and the scanner was a lot softer. Maybe a v600 would've been sharper, but for my specific case, no point in using this scanner at the moment.
Do you feel that your v600 is sharper than the dslr ? or vice versa?
I just bought an old macro bellows to use with my vintage Minolta lenses on my x pro 2 body so I can do this. I prefer scanning medium and large format film with the epson, but 35mm is much faster and better (for me, anyway) with the camera style of digitizing. Gives me something to do while we’re all trapped inside, lol
What’s the best focal length to get the whole negative in frame?
Hey man can I scan film without developing them?
Wow!!! You convinced me to try my DSLR as opposed to me scanner to see if I dig it!!!
great video again man, ive got a question if you dont mind;
say im shooting 200 speed film and im following the sunny 16 rule... I have my asa set to 200, my shutter at 1/250 and my aperture F8, F11 for sunny day. If i want to still overexpose my film would I simply change my ASA to 100 and shoot as normal? thankyou
just got back into film photography inspired by your videos so going to try this while i save for a scanner
Super new to film photography. Does the film need to be developed first before I scan it?
Yes
you gotta teach me how to haggle i mean 60 to 20???
I recently learned that Silverfast is available for free for Epson v550 and V600. I only use it for color scans though due to the preset that it have. It is amazing. Maybe you can looking into that for your Epson
Use Vuescan software, as it covers so many brands / models of scanners, and it's so customisable with loads of film profiles.
Flatbed is not that great for 35mm film. You could consider getting some ANR glass and that would help but for 35mm film you should consider a real film scanner (I have the Pacific Image Prime Film XA). I started using a workflow of scanning RAW images with Vuescan and converting using ColorPerfect. The results I get with CP are much better than what I get from the lab. Silverfast also does a great job (crop within the borders though) if you want to just take care of everything in the scanner software. I don't know all the science behind it but there is a reason film scanners (including those nice Epson flat beds) use CCD sensors. The CCD sensor is supposed to give better results over CMOS when it comes to scanning film. I will say though that if you nail the DLSR process you can quickly get some proofs which could help you decide which images you want to scan at a higher resolution.
I really appreciate your videos, and you are one of those ppl that influenced me going back, grab my Canon AE-1 and shoot film again! Thx!
You may hate this question, but where do you edit you photos? What's the program? :)
Great video 🤘🏻 as always
Now considering selling my optic scanner... I love it but it takes so long to scan in high resolution.
Where do you go thrifting?
The main issue with this workflow is it is only optimised for 135 film shooters. For 120 or large format shooters, basically you should ignore it entirely unless you want to do crazy image stitching or have your (larger than 135 size) negative cropped to below digital full frame resolution.
Nice! I have the same macro lens but it's even better you have the original box
This is probably a dumb question but why does your lightroom look so different from the lightroom I use?
Chedfer Kismet Lightroom classic vs Lightroom cc
in my experience you are going to get better results in total darkness, with gaffers tape on the light table surrounding the negative if possible. if you don't do that you will get a halo effect that lowers contrast.
something that is overlooked almost everywhere on TH-cam; maximize your quality and your time and get an extension tube!!?! fill as much of the digital frame as possible... the math can be tricky but i use the hard to find Pentax HELOCOID extension tube and the 100mm macro. as close to total frame coverage as possible is what you want.
the last thing i would suggest is turning an old enlarger into a copy stand, it's easy to adapt a quick release onto an old enlarger. please don't encourage your subs to cannibalize nice enlargers though, some of us still use them!?! literally any strurdy old enlarger will do... the one i have can be easily converted to digitize or back to making prints by removing the light table and reattaching the old head. comparatively verses the tripod, it allows for height adjustment only... but if you need to shoot medium format just pick up a height adjustable tripod head to attach to your quick release.
this concept using the enlarger took me months, but it works and it was fun to build. you're welcome.
#themoreyouknow
You can also use your smartphone as a lightbox. It gives more even light than a very cheap lighttable.
yes but pixel of that screen will appear
@@wahyuprasojo5148 not if you have it in a carrier. It usually places the film a couple of mm above the screen.
Can anyone recommend light pads or light tables please
I switched over to mirrorless camera from my Epson v850. So much faster and sharper to use . I bought a plug in for Lightroom that when you import them it will convert them from a negative. Super worth having that price of software cause you can batch process them into Lightroom.
Some other people mentioned it. Negative lab pro plug in for Lightroom. So much faster and the whole process is way better than a flat bed
Which lens did you use ?
This was super cool and helpful, glad I found your channel ✌🏽
hey guys can i use my Olympus Pen F for this?
You should bring photoshop instead of lightroom into the mix... cmd+i will invert the image in .3 seconds, then you can either choose to do the rest of the edits in ps or send it to lightroom...(I'd do in photoshop it is faster and easier.....only problem is working with lot of files, but if you are doing a roll at a time it wouldn't take much time)
My dude! For anyone using Lightroom: build presets for your most commonly used types of film, and set those presets to apply on import. Presets applied on import is what's going to save you time on the back end!
do you develop film by yourself?
You can even use an Ipad or phone with the screen set to white.
Great video, you did a good job
Hey Jvpes can you plz review the yashica electro 35 GSM plz
I already bought a zenit 122 with an 58mm lens and just waiting on delivery,also i'm shooting with expired film,any tips jvpes?
As a rule, the speed (sensitivity) of the film halves every ten years. So, for example, if the speed on the box is 200 ASA and the film is ten years old, then set the exposure meter to 100 ASA. If the film is 20 years old, then meter at 50 ASA. If the film has been stored in a freezer, then the rate of deterioration is less.
notification squad🤟
GANG 🤓
Damn, so jealous to be able to thrift a brand new, in box macro lens. Here in Australia that would be extremely difficult to pull off. Nothing analog usually around
I think scanning is better because of all that dust you mentioned. But If you have extra Money for a software Like negative lab pro or so you can adjust the colors from the beginning in the right Direction without manipuliate the colors afterwards. Thanks for the Video 👍
Yo yo yo man! Give us the link to the light pad man!
Trying this dslr scanning thing but i always get some pixels of my lightsource in my scans.. i just can precisely focus at the grain i think. Even if i get it as precise i can, i still see some lines / forms of pixels..:-( i also tried lifting the negative from just laying on the lightpad.. anyone suggetions how to get this sorted?
I’m really hooked on your content. Simple, engaging and informative and as someone who has just come back to film it’s one of my go to channels. So thank you.
Do the same here in Germany, cheap way is use your ipad or smart Phone for light
I 'm no photographer but I understand some film shooter shoots film because of the look that is very different from bayer filter look. So why then subjecting your film to the bayer filter interpolation instead of buying or using affordable full rgb color dedicated scanner.
Was that Quentyn from moreskids at 10:35? Lol
Great video!
I've had a bias against dslr scanning bc everyone I know that did it wouldn't focus or color correct 😂 this definitely changes my perspective 👍
Also I would suggest testing out capture one for sony, I've had issuess with color and sharpness rendering with lightroom for sony & Fuji.
Been wanting to get into this
This is great!
Ayeeeeee
Sad to say that with the Coronavirus, the upcoming months are going to be hard for small businesses especially for film photo labs. Scanning film at home/diy may become more commonplace if labs close.