Great video once again, Ted. I've been scanning and processing negatives in Photoshop for about 6 months now but I've never really gotten the results I wanted - the workflow never "clicked" for me in the same way that darkroom printing does. Seeing how you approach makes the Photoshop workflow make a lot more sense to me!
With those flat beds you're using for Medium Format, are the DPI divided by the entire scanning area or just the area being cropped and scanned? With dedicated film scanners, like 35mm Coolscans and the models that handle Medium Format like the 9000, the DPI is essentially entirely 1x1 to the negative or slide. It seems like using a significantly cropped DSLR sensor against a full frame sensor with an A4 flatbed. Both may be a 24Mp DSLR sensor, but the crop factor of the DX is going to have to be taken into account (not really 24Mp). In the way that people who may use a 12Mp Smartphone think that a tiny little fingernail sensor is going to do the same job as a 12Mp D700. I hope I make sense (I don't think I do, one glass of red too many), but there you go. Though, yeah, if you want to have your analogue work digitally printed, flatbeds are a good way to proof them before you send them off to the lab for the FlexTight. One thing that irritates me about certain types of digital heads though is they think once you can 'see the grain' (a mild smudge) then that's the maximum resolution and range that medium has to offer. How wrong they are. It doesn't occur to them that once you zoom in further and further those grains will look like digital Lego blocks. That's the machine's interpretation of film grain, where are the tones in between the digitized hard lines as you get closer and closer? Let them never speak boastfully of 'superior micro contrast' again. Darkroom.
Hello Ted... I recent purchased a Optek 8200i 35mm film scanner. I want to scan all of my films that I shot from the 80s and 90s. I've been scanning my film to jpegs, but was wondering if it was worth it to scan as tiff? I've heard its better to edit tiffs over jpegs, but is it worth it to scan as tiff over jpeg when scanning 35mm film?
Beauty, thanks Ted. I always wondered why my scanned and printed negs always looked..off. The resampling would be why. Nifty trick. Already looking forward to the next episode; thanks again!
I appreciate your philosophy of letting the image speak for itself, as I am of that same school of thought. Keep up the great work and thank you for the videos.
Good evening Ted Forbes! again many joyful AOP moments for me..... it was another very fruitful day, thanks to your videos. This week I have learned so much, about working with F3, scanning, metadata, scanning negatives, S curves... wow... I love every lecture you give. This video was awesome, I will now start working with the S-curve.. I need one night rest so the lessons can sink in :-) And tomorrow hopefully another happy AOP-day, I will follow your leading lines: since September, the 4th month on a row now..... see ya later !!! Your style of explaining is working very well for me, so keep it please :-)
Dad always longed for a Hasselblad but he never indulged into one, but I got his Mamiya Press camera with three negative sizes, 6 X 9, 6 X 6 and 6 X 4.5!
I wanna ask you also, Do you think the Fuji GW690III is a good medium format camera? Is the lens sharp enough for a fixed lens camera system? Is it easy to use camparing it to a Mamiya 7 or something? thank you very much, and again super nice video! :)
Resolution decreases at least in Photoshop rescaling (downscaling softens image too). So it makes most sense to resize the final image to the final print resolution, that the printer is going to print at. And then apply the final sharpening. Of course it could be that the current printers are so advanced, that they compensate for all this on their own. I just wonder what is the ideal workflow for printing. Change the resolution or not?
Sir, I saw the demonstration of scanning the negatives. I am a medical person. I have 35mm negative films, all the copies of x-ray films. Now I like to have them digitized. But the way of getting them digitized, I do not know. Is there any way of achieving my aim? What scanner would perform the function? Does it need any soft ware? If possible please make a reply for this. (Sivakkolunthu)
So you don't just scan the negative as it is, you manipulate it prior to saving the scan and importing into PS/LR? Couldn't you adjust in PS/LR in the same manner that you did with the scanning software and save a step?
Love your videos! I appreciate all of the work that you put into them. I'm getting started in 8x10 (B&W) and I'm finding a way to scan them to be challenging. I would like to get an enlarger some day, but don't have the space for it right now. I do have a Epson 9880 with a 44" width that I'll be staring with as I want to print as big as possible. Epson makes a V7XX and V8XX that are popular. I have read about newton rings an focus issues. I'm looking at an Epson 11000XL Photo edition (which has auto focus built in) and wet scanning. Do you have any thoughts on this combo? Thanks...
I have a question hope you can get back to me quick would it matter how you put the negatives, this is because I forgot how to put the negative into the tray and when I scanned it came up black no images what should I do ?
Hey Ted, great video as always. Do you think there are any advantages to scanning or printing black and white film images in full color? I'm wondering if you lose anything if you go straight greyscale.
Hi can you show us how to scan color negative films? I'm just curious is there a way to scan color negatives neutrally without changing the original characteristic of the film.. Thank you..
Wrong on the flash sync explanation. There were three flash sync settings for flash, the Hasselblad had two. The first was the "X" setting for electronic flash, where the flash was triggered at the peak opening of the shutter. The electronic flash is essentially instantaneous compared to the slower moving shutter. 2. The "M" setting for medium peak flashbulb, where the slower burning flashbulb was given a head start for the maximum opening of the faster shutter. 3. "FP" where the very long burning "FP"bulbs were given a head start so that the burn could last the whole time of the "traveling slit" of a focal plane shutter. The very early focal plane Hasselblads (1000F ?) may have an FP setting, I don't know. One could check the electronic flash by looking through the camera shutter at a piece of paper lit by the flash, if you saw the full aperture when fired it was syncing.
What are you using for scanning? I'm looking at scanners now to scan my 120 film and would like the ability to create really large prints (3'x3" +/-). Considering the Epson V800, but would be interested to hear your thoughts.
He is using a 4870 in this video, which is several years old now but was a high end flatbed in it's day. Now, the v800 is highly regarded and will be able to get a lot of detail out of a 120 neg or trans. 3'x3' is probably dependent on technique. Both in the camera and also during the scan.
I have a GW690 and I'm really happy with it. The lens is sharp and it's about as easy to use as 35mm rangefinder, but bigger. It's really simple to operate.
Thanx Ted , great info. I was tought to scan @ 48b HDR colour and then turn it into a B&W image in PS for better results but I see no real difference against scanning in grayscale. What do you think ? Also changing into B&W via modus-LAB and then dumping the A&B layer seems to dump a lot detail so I tend to stick to grayscale scanning now.
I have a very low end scanner, and I was really disappointed of results, till I tried an alternative software (V.Scanner) and i'm really seeing and improvement in my scans.
Hi Ted. You've talked about an lens option than can get your film real dark. I've processed 2 rolls made with my Hasselblad c500 with that same lens and they came out transparent with the leaders visible. Can be the same problem? Can you explain what have you done in your lens to get the sync right? Thanks!!
Paulo Simões Three settings; V, M, and X. V is the self-timer, M is for flash bulbs that you will never use, X is for electronic flash. Use only X. If the lettering has rubbed off, then X is the middle position. (On the Hassy you have to push a little tab FORWARD before you can move the V/X/M lever.)
Hi Ted, I'd like to scan my negatives but I'm a bit torn when it comes to scanners. All the stores around here try to push me to get an Epson V600 without 'real' explanation. When googling most positive reviews are about the V600 and I think that's also why the stores push me on this decision. On the other hand this scanner is already on the market for ten years and I see dedicated film scanners like the Plustek 8200 range or Reflecta 7200 (Pacific in the US). On paper they have better stats then the V600. As I said before, yet nobody advices me to take those. I'm just looking for the best quality scan and I'm dedicated to 35mm so I was hoping you can help me on this matter. Thank you very much.
Hi Ted, many thanks for so many interesting and excellent videos. Please may I ask: I have a Epson V600 and if I scan my BW negative films. If I put the film in as recommended by Epson - shiny side down - all of them are bent enough to touch the glas of the scanner, all the length of the film stripes (I cut my 35mm rolls into stripes of 6 pictures), what results in heavy occurrence of ugly Newton Rings. If I put the in shiny side up, the results are out of focus. Any hint or trick how I can avoid the NR's? I'd really appreciate any reply. Many thanks in advance!
Roland Rick hi, i have exactly the same problem. Apart from buying a replacement high end neg holder i have been told that you can get a acetate which be cut into strips and used as a stiffener. Not sure if this will effect the quality but compared to spending £100 on a neg holder its worth a try. Be interested to know if you find any other solutions.
Regarding the two kinds of flash... The flash sync intended for use with bulbs did not have a delay to wait for the bulb to overcome its peak. In fact, it is the opposite. The shutter is delayed in order to give the bulb time to reach its maximum peak of light and then the shutter is opened. Bulbs gives a look like unlike that of electronic flash and can be very desirable. Give them ago! Cheers!
Spot on, I used to buy boxes of a dozen P5 bulbs at goodwill stores for 50 cents. Good times. Sadly they are about 40 times that price now days. Apparently the current production is for cinematic and special purpose use so the demand is not high enough to support affordable prices.
I think you have the idea of FP sync backwards. It fired the bulb a little before the shutter was tripped to allow the bulb to ramp up so the shot was taken when the bulb was its brightest. Please remember flashbulbs were used when ASA ratings typically maxed out at 100. Yes, it was ASA back then.
hey ted! thank you very very much for this video, it contains very useful information, just what I was looking for... I wanna ask you something, I've been shotting 35mm film cameras for the last 5 months, and I want to upgrade my camera system for a medium format; A good friend is selling me his Fuji GW690III in almost new condition, he is asking 700 dollars for the camera, but unfortunetaly we neither know much about that camera, so I want to ask you if that camera is worth to purchase?
i know Im asking randomly but does any of you know of a way to get back into an instagram account..? I somehow lost the account password. I appreciate any tips you can give me.
I am curious to know if anyone can tell me what the meaning of the suffix is which Kodak used to print on a slide. For example, every slide used to have the date followed by a suffix, e.g., Jun 69 C1. In this case what was the significance of the C1?
I have tried to make copies of my old slides using a simple lightbox. I am using a Nikon D810 with a Zeiss 100 F2 Makro lens. But after I get the shots into LR they do not look sharp. I am also using some extension tubes in this process also. My eyes are not great at 57 y/o but the camera says the slide is in focus. What amp I doing wrong?
+hawg427 For your lens resolution might be best at f5.6. Have you tried using a tripod, shutter cable & mirror lock-up after focussing with live view? I use a similar setup for film negatives, so not sure how it applies to slides but hopefully it can be of some help.
I know your edit was really rough and in all probability you would have worked on it longer, maybe looked at some dark dark luminosity masks for the corner? But there was something about your second image I really liked, I think it was the fact it was slightly soft white against the dark shadow but I would be happy to have a small print of it on my wall.
Hey Ted, I just happened to get a hold of the exact same Epson model that you have, But I have a problem with installing the software for it. I think it could be because the software was made round 1999 and since Windows 7 wasn't out then.. you know. what did you do to make it work on your computer? All the best/Oskar
blood angel No. The high point in flatbed scanning was the 1990s, when everything was shot on film. Depending on whether you want to run it on a modern computer or you don't mind buying an old Mac and a SCSI card, there are two ways to go. You can get these on eBay for pennies on the dollar. If you want to use your modern computer, an Agfa Arcus is just fine. You will need a USB-to-SCSI converter if you don't have slots in your machine, or a SCSI card if you have PCI slots, and a copy of VueScan. If an old Mac is not out of the realm of possibility, look for Linotype Topaz, Screen Cezanne, or anything from Scitex. Make very sure it comes with the driver software, and if you get a Topaz make sure you also get the scanner glass. (Don't laugh - the glass on a Topaz is removable, and most operators bought the machine with two glasses so they could scan on one while mounting the other.)
Yes. Usually, you should be able to set your scanner to "Black and White Negative", which will tell the computer that these are B/W negatives and it should automatically turn them into positive images. Same goes for color negatives (It should have a seperate setting Color Negative or something like that). Worst case you can do it in Photoshop as well
New subscriber. Excellent description of Photoshop, esp. curves. You should consider doing a series on Photoshop and/or lightroom. Even though those topics are bloated with uploaded youtube videos I think your contribution would be worthwhile. Thanks, Roald Euller
I am scanning my 35 mm negatives on a Polaroid SprintScan 35 and a PowerMac G3 but the results aren't that great! In color I usually have to manipulate tone and color resulting in a brownish cast in underexposed flash pictures...
But wouldn't it be better to put the film directly against the scanner's glass and force it flat with a transparent sheet on top? How can you be sure you're getting perfect focus of the grain when the film is naturally slightly warped?
Just curious, is it gonna be any different between film photograph -> scan -> photoshop comparing with the digital photograph -> photoshop ???. note: nice video
Ted absolutely loved this brings me back and I had no idea adorama was still around but when I used them they would give it free for people some times especially if you signed up as new and eventually found others. Thanks so much for sharing brings back memories of how much I enjoyed. Thanks so much for sharing and your absolutely correct some times you can correct what didn't work out to well.Can't tell you how much I enjoyed watching Deb.😉👍✌👌
I got a cheap (under $50) Epson 4490 for my film scanner and it works really well. I was using those cheapo-crappy ones for 35mm and they suck (and obviously couldn't even do medium format). For a while I was 'scanning' in my images by taking a photo with my dslr. The negative was mounted in front of a light, on a light table, or in front of a flash... this worked ok, but it was a HUGE hassle to do, so I never did it. Flatbed scanners are so nice and easy.
Digitalrev suggested using a monitor set to all white and taking a picture with a macro lens on a camera with a tripod. What do you think would be better?
was it? because scanning with a DSLR is actually a thing, and while it takes a bit more fucking around to get the final image, the resolution is actually higher than I can get on a epson 4990 when scanning a 35mm negative. 6x7 is a different story.
Hello Ted, I used a Hasselblad 2000FCM for over 10 years. I shot so many landscape with a 50mm Carl Zeiss lens. I have so many negatives and am happy to have watched this video showing how to scan these negatives. I have a Canon flatbed scanner that does not do a very good job of scanning. Do you have any suggestions for me on scanners i could buy? Thank You for the video!! :)
I thought the flash bulb setting is delayed because it takes longer for a flash bulb to fire compared to an electronic flash...thus your flash went off before the shutter opened....
I wonder if you ever explore what does the printer do to the image when it's going to print it. Because realistically printers can't achieve 777dpi. Don't know about inkjet, but offset printers max out between 300-400. And that's for glossy paper. Matte papers produce lower resolution. So I think that printer either up-reses or down-reses the input resolution depending in the image. And when that happens, inpun image resolution decreases slightly.
Just saying thank-you for thinking differently about creating images. Have a collection of negatives going back to the late 60s, most b/w. I have found something to keep myself occupied during the European Winter evenings.
Just want to mention that scanning negatives with a DSLR (with a tripod, a macro lens and uniform light) is a really good way to digitize negatives too!
My top tip for scanning is to get someone else to do it! I use a lab that charges £3 for developing and scanning any C41 film, with scans sent over the Internet and the negatives by return of post. I buy XP2 locally, and send it off when I'm done. The scans are about 4MB jpeg files; ok for playing around with, and they're easier to look at than contact prints. Lots of my friends say it's "cheating", but I think farming out the bits you find boring is just sensible.
It is not a regular office all-in-one scanner thing because they work taking a picture of the reflecting surface (paper facing down towards the light) instead of the light THROUGH the film as in the film scanner does... most film scanners have both functionalities (paper and film)... although there are some just for a specific use!
If you're refering to the Nikon F5 metadata, no. It's just information recorded about the exposure, you'll need the scanner to scan your film and transfer your images, then it has nothing to do with the metadata. Hope that helps you.
=D i love your videos . Im starting to take my first serious steps into photography and all your videos are awesome . Thanks for sharing your knowledge and love for your art .
Where do I find "The Art of Photography" on iTunes? I would like to get a paid subscription. These seminars are on par with The British Journal of Photography, in terms of the enjoyment that I derive from both of them!
If the original was a COLOUR negative, then by all means I'd scan it in colour even if I wanted the end result in b&w so that I could change the tonality of each colour....
To me, it seems that scanning 120 negs is like ordering an americano in italy. You're taking something with inherent depth and beauty, and putting water in it. Can we see your darkrroom skills? Lets see some murial prints, and prints from positives.
@@MrSwaggernaut83 The problem is: A scanner will take 30-60 seconds per scan, depending on your resolution and computer. A DSLR or mirror-less camera setup will only take 1/125 of a second per "scan" with at least 10 times the resolution. I understand aldebaran question: I'm 71 and need to get this project done while I'm still cognizant and able to do it. You don't need the latest camera, I use a Canon 5D Mark III. There are many TH-cam videos showing how to do this. That's how I learned. Your mileage will vary.
The video was definitely helpful. So many TH-cam photographers obsess on gear and have garbage photos to show. These are legit beautiful.
Great video once again, Ted. I've been scanning and processing negatives in Photoshop for about 6 months now but I've never really gotten the results I wanted - the workflow never "clicked" for me in the same way that darkroom printing does. Seeing how you approach makes the Photoshop workflow make a lot more sense to me!
With those flat beds you're using for Medium Format, are the DPI divided by the entire scanning area or just the area being cropped and scanned? With dedicated film scanners, like 35mm Coolscans and the models that handle Medium Format like the 9000, the DPI is essentially entirely 1x1 to the negative or slide. It seems like using a significantly cropped DSLR sensor against a full frame sensor with an A4 flatbed. Both may be a 24Mp DSLR sensor, but the crop factor of the DX is going to have to be taken into account (not really 24Mp). In the way that people who may use a 12Mp Smartphone think that a tiny little fingernail sensor is going to do the same job as a 12Mp D700.
I hope I make sense (I don't think I do, one glass of red too many), but there you go.
Though, yeah, if you want to have your analogue work digitally printed, flatbeds are a good way to proof them before you send them off to the lab for the FlexTight.
One thing that irritates me about certain types of digital heads though is they think once you can 'see the grain' (a mild smudge) then that's the maximum resolution and range that medium has to offer. How wrong they are. It doesn't occur to them that once you zoom in further and further those grains will look like digital Lego blocks. That's the machine's interpretation of film grain, where are the tones in between the digitized hard lines as you get closer and closer? Let them never speak boastfully of 'superior micro contrast' again.
Darkroom.
Thanks for making this Ted, I'm taking an analog class in a few months and this is exactly what I was looking for!
Hello Ted... I recent purchased a Optek 8200i 35mm film scanner. I want to scan all of my films that I shot from the 80s and 90s. I've been scanning my film to jpegs, but was wondering if it was worth it to scan as tiff? I've heard its better to edit tiffs over jpegs, but is it worth it to scan as tiff over jpeg when scanning 35mm film?
Beauty, thanks Ted. I always wondered why my scanned and printed negs always looked..off. The resampling would be why. Nifty trick. Already looking forward to the next episode; thanks again!
I appreciate your philosophy of letting the image speak for itself, as I am of that same school of thought. Keep up the great work and thank you for the videos.
Good evening Ted Forbes! again many joyful AOP moments for me..... it was another very fruitful day, thanks to your videos. This week I have learned so much, about working with F3, scanning, metadata, scanning negatives, S curves... wow... I love every lecture you give. This video was awesome, I will now start working with the S-curve.. I need one night rest so the lessons can sink in :-) And tomorrow hopefully another happy AOP-day, I will follow your leading lines: since September, the 4th month on a row now..... see ya later !!! Your style of explaining is working very well for me, so keep it please :-)
Dad always longed for a Hasselblad but he never indulged into one, but I got his Mamiya Press camera with three negative sizes, 6 X 9, 6 X 6 and 6 X 4.5!
I've just started shooting film again and trying to do exactly what you demonstrated in this video. Very helpful. Thanks.
I wanna ask you also, Do you think the Fuji GW690III is a good medium format camera? Is the lens sharp enough for a fixed lens camera system? Is it easy to use camparing it to a Mamiya 7 or something? thank you very much, and again super nice video! :)
Resolution decreases at least in Photoshop rescaling (downscaling softens image too). So it makes most sense to resize the final image to the final print resolution, that the printer is going to print at. And then apply the final sharpening.
Of course it could be that the current printers are so advanced, that they compensate for all this on their own.
I just wonder what is the ideal workflow for printing. Change the resolution or not?
Sir, I saw the demonstration of scanning the negatives. I am a medical person. I have 35mm negative films, all the copies of x-ray films. Now I like to have them digitized. But the way of getting them digitized, I do not know. Is there any way of achieving my aim? What scanner would perform the function? Does it need any soft ware? If possible please make a reply for this. (Sivakkolunthu)
So you don't just scan the negative as it is, you manipulate it prior to saving the scan and importing into PS/LR?
Couldn't you adjust in PS/LR in the same manner that you did with the scanning software and save a step?
Love your videos! I appreciate all of the work that you put into them. I'm getting started in 8x10 (B&W) and I'm finding a way to scan them to be challenging. I would like to get an enlarger some day, but don't have the space for it right now. I do have a Epson 9880 with a 44" width that I'll be staring with as I want to print as big as possible. Epson makes a V7XX and V8XX that are popular. I have read about newton rings an focus issues. I'm looking at an Epson 11000XL Photo edition (which has auto focus built in) and wet scanning. Do you have any thoughts on this combo? Thanks...
Hey Ted, I was wondering if you exported your image out of photoshop (and uploaded to Adorama's site) as a tif or jpg file?
These botanicals are amazing. Even though it's just a testing image, the second image you worked on was just beautiful.
I have a question hope you can get back to me quick would it matter how you put the negatives, this is because I forgot how to put the negative into the tray and when I scanned it came up black no images what should I do ?
Hey Ted, great video as always. Do you think there are any advantages to scanning or printing black and white film images in full color? I'm wondering if you lose anything if you go straight greyscale.
Hi can you show us how to scan color negative films? I'm just curious is there a way to scan color negatives neutrally without changing the original characteristic of the film.. Thank you..
Wrong on the flash sync explanation. There were three flash sync settings for flash, the Hasselblad had two. The first was the "X" setting for electronic flash, where the flash was triggered at the peak opening of the shutter. The electronic flash is essentially instantaneous compared to the slower moving shutter. 2. The "M" setting for medium peak flashbulb, where the slower burning flashbulb was given a head start for the maximum opening of the faster shutter. 3. "FP" where the very long burning "FP"bulbs were given a head start so that the burn could last the whole time of the "traveling slit" of a focal plane shutter. The very early focal plane Hasselblads (1000F ?) may have an FP setting, I don't know. One could check the electronic flash by looking through the camera shutter at a piece of paper lit by the flash, if you saw the full aperture when fired it was syncing.
Them tulips came out amazing! You have a very nice creative eye. Very cool!
What are you using for scanning? I'm looking at scanners now to scan my 120 film and would like the ability to create really large prints (3'x3" +/-). Considering the Epson V800, but would be interested to hear your thoughts.
He is using a 4870 in this video, which is several years old now but was a high end flatbed in it's day. Now, the v800 is highly regarded and will be able to get a lot of detail out of a 120 neg or trans. 3'x3' is probably dependent on technique. Both in the camera and also during the scan.
I have a GW690 and I'm really happy with it. The lens is sharp and it's about as easy to use as 35mm rangefinder, but bigger. It's really simple to operate.
Thanx Ted , great info. I was tought to scan @ 48b HDR colour and then turn it into a B&W image in PS for better results but I see no real difference against scanning in grayscale. What do you think ? Also changing into B&W via modus-LAB and then dumping the A&B layer seems to dump a lot detail so I tend to stick to grayscale scanning now.
what is your choice of 35mm scanner?
I have a very low end scanner, and I was really disappointed of results, till I tried an alternative software (V.Scanner) and i'm really seeing and improvement in my scans.
Hi Ted.
You've talked about an lens option than can get your film real dark. I've processed 2 rolls made with my Hasselblad c500 with that same lens and they came out transparent with the leaders visible.
Can be the same problem? Can you explain what have you done in your lens to get the sync right?
Thanks!!
Paulo Simões Sounds like a developing issue - not a lens issue.
Paulo Simões Three settings; V, M, and X. V is the self-timer, M is for flash bulbs that you will never use, X is for electronic flash. Use only X. If the lettering has rubbed off, then X is the middle position. (On the Hassy you have to push a little tab FORWARD before you can move the V/X/M lever.)
Hi Ted, I'd like to scan my negatives but I'm a bit torn when it comes to scanners. All the stores around here try to push me to get an Epson V600 without 'real' explanation. When googling most positive reviews are about the V600 and I think that's also why the stores push me on this decision. On the other hand this scanner is already on the market for ten years and I see dedicated film scanners like the Plustek 8200 range or Reflecta 7200 (Pacific in the US). On paper they have better stats then the V600. As I said before, yet nobody advices me to take those. I'm just looking for the best quality scan and I'm dedicated to 35mm so I was hoping you can help me on this matter. Thank you very much.
Hey Ted, I may have missed it, but did you ever do a video on how to take pictures like the ones shown in the video?
Hi Ted, many thanks for so many interesting and excellent videos. Please may I ask: I have a Epson V600 and if I scan my BW negative films. If I put the film in as recommended by Epson - shiny side down - all of them are bent enough to touch the glas of the scanner, all the length of the film stripes (I cut my 35mm rolls into stripes of 6 pictures), what results in heavy occurrence of ugly Newton Rings. If I put the in shiny side up, the results are out of focus. Any hint or trick how I can avoid the NR's? I'd really appreciate any reply. Many thanks in advance!
Roland Rick hi, i have exactly the same problem. Apart from buying a replacement high end neg holder i have been told that you can get a acetate which be cut into strips and used as a stiffener. Not sure if this will effect the quality but compared to spending £100 on a neg holder its worth a try. Be interested to know if you find any other solutions.
Hi Ted, will you do a review on Negative Lab Pro and the Intrepid Enlarger?
Regarding the two kinds of flash... The flash sync intended for use with bulbs did not have a delay to wait for the bulb to overcome its peak. In fact, it is the opposite. The shutter is delayed in order to give the bulb time to reach its maximum peak of light and then the shutter is opened. Bulbs gives a look like unlike that of electronic flash and can be very desirable. Give them ago! Cheers!
Spot on, I used to buy boxes of a dozen P5 bulbs at goodwill stores for 50 cents. Good times. Sadly they are about 40 times that price now days. Apparently the current production is for cinematic and special purpose use so the demand is not high enough to support affordable prices.
Loved your episode on Sual Leiter. He is one of my favorites.
I think you have the idea of FP sync backwards. It fired the bulb a little before the shutter was tripped to allow the bulb to ramp up so the shot was taken when the bulb was its brightest. Please remember flashbulbs were used when ASA ratings typically maxed out at 100. Yes, it was ASA back then.
hey ted! thank you very very much for this video, it contains very useful information, just what I was looking for... I wanna ask you something, I've been shotting 35mm film cameras for the last 5 months, and I want to upgrade my camera system for a medium format; A good friend is selling me his Fuji GW690III in almost new condition, he is asking 700 dollars for the camera, but unfortunetaly we neither know much about that camera, so I want to ask you if that camera is worth to purchase?
Hey great stuff thanks, one q, Can I mess Up my Negative If I'm not using the negative scanner holder? Or its ok to scan it as it is?
Thrilling, a true Master Class. Thank you.
i know Im asking randomly but does any of you know of a way to get back into an instagram account..?
I somehow lost the account password. I appreciate any tips you can give me.
@Timothy Kyler Instablaster ;)
Awesome episode! could you possibly recommend some really good scanners? I'm going to be investing in one soon.
I am curious to know if anyone can tell me what the meaning of the suffix is which Kodak used to print on a slide. For example, every slide used to have the date followed by a suffix, e.g., Jun 69 C1. In this case what was the significance of the C1?
I have tried to make copies of my old slides using a simple lightbox. I am using a Nikon D810 with a Zeiss 100 F2 Makro lens. But after I get the shots into LR they do not look sharp. I am also using some extension tubes in this process also. My eyes are not great at 57 y/o but the camera says the slide is in focus. What amp I doing wrong?
hawg427 you might want to try putting a sheet of glass between the light box and slides but I'm not sure
+hawg427 For your lens resolution might be best at f5.6. Have you tried using a tripod, shutter cable & mirror lock-up after focussing with live view?
I use a similar setup for film negatives, so not sure how it applies to slides but hopefully it can be of some help.
Fantastic video Ted! Really needed this, I just bought a Negative Scanner and this surely helped!
I know your edit was really rough and in all probability you would have worked on it longer, maybe looked at some dark dark luminosity masks for the corner? But there was something about your second image I really liked, I think it was the fact it was slightly soft white against the dark shadow but I would be happy to have a small print of it on my wall.
Hey Ted, I just happened to get a hold of the exact same Epson model that you have, But I have a problem with installing the software for it. I think it could be because the software was made round 1999 and since Windows 7 wasn't out then.. you know. what did you do to make it work on your computer? All the best/Oskar
Are there any good film scanners on the market today? I have an old Minolta Dimage Scan Dual IV which is fine for 35mm but won't do MF or even 4x5.
blood angel No. The high point in flatbed scanning was the 1990s, when everything was shot on film. Depending on whether you want to run it on a modern computer or you don't mind buying an old Mac and a SCSI card, there are two ways to go. You can get these on eBay for pennies on the dollar.
If you want to use your modern computer, an Agfa Arcus is just fine. You will need a USB-to-SCSI converter if you don't have slots in your machine, or a SCSI card if you have PCI slots, and a copy of VueScan.
If an old Mac is not out of the realm of possibility, look for Linotype Topaz, Screen Cezanne, or anything from Scitex. Make very sure it comes with the driver software, and if you get a Topaz make sure you also get the scanner glass. (Don't laugh - the glass on a Topaz is removable, and most operators bought the machine with two glasses so they could scan on one while mounting the other.)
Please confirm for me if the Epson perfection V600 photo scanner can scan an x-ray film
so black and white negatives can be turned into positives through a scanner? does that apply to color negatives as well?
Yes. Usually, you should be able to set your scanner to "Black and White Negative", which will tell the computer that these are B/W negatives and it should automatically turn them into positive images. Same goes for color negatives (It should have a seperate setting Color Negative or something like that).
Worst case you can do it in Photoshop as well
New subscriber. Excellent description of Photoshop, esp. curves. You should consider doing a series on Photoshop and/or lightroom. Even though those topics are bloated with uploaded youtube videos I think your contribution would be worthwhile. Thanks, Roald Euller
Where can we pick up that negative carrier?
love the series, can not wait to see the rest!
I am scanning my 35 mm negatives on a Polaroid SprintScan 35 and a PowerMac G3 but the results aren't that great! In color I usually have to manipulate tone and color resulting in a brownish cast in underexposed flash pictures...
What scanner model is this?
Thank you once again Ted. These episodes are a Godsend.
But wouldn't it be better to put the film directly against the scanner's glass and force it flat with a transparent sheet on top?
How can you be sure you're getting perfect focus of the grain when the film is naturally slightly warped?
Just curious, is it gonna be any different between film photograph -> scan -> photoshop comparing with the digital photograph -> photoshop ???. note: nice video
Oh absolutely. Personally, digital noise bothers me more than physical grain, and digital grain is a fine line between noise and emulation of a detail
Thanks Ted !
I really enjoyed this episode. Looking forward to Part 2.
Great episode Ted..thanks for taking the time to create them for us
Can you give me the link for part 2?
Ted absolutely loved this brings me back and I had no idea adorama was still around but when I used them they would give it free for people some times especially if you signed up as new and eventually found others. Thanks so much for sharing brings back memories of how much I enjoyed. Thanks so much for sharing and your absolutely correct some times you can correct what didn't work out to well.Can't tell you how much I enjoyed watching Deb.😉👍✌👌
Excellent ted, thanks for posing this. Can't wait for the next one!
I got a cheap (under $50) Epson 4490 for my film scanner and it works really well. I was using those cheapo-crappy ones for 35mm and they suck (and obviously couldn't even do medium format).
For a while I was 'scanning' in my images by taking a photo with my dslr. The negative was mounted in front of a light, on a light table, or in front of a flash... this worked ok, but it was a HUGE hassle to do, so I never did it. Flatbed scanners are so nice and easy.
Digitalrev suggested using a monitor set to all white and taking a picture with a macro lens on a camera with a tripod. What do you think would be better?
That was a gag
was it? because scanning with a DSLR is actually a thing, and while it takes a bit more fucking around to get the final image, the resolution is actually higher than I can get on a epson 4990 when scanning a 35mm negative. 6x7 is a different story.
As long as the monitor has something flat over it to diffuse light it would be okay, otherwise the pixels light the negative unevenly
excellent instructional video ... a crisp, clear presentation ... kudos
Hello Ted, I used a Hasselblad 2000FCM for over 10 years. I shot so many landscape with a 50mm Carl Zeiss lens. I have so many negatives and am happy to have watched this video showing how to scan these negatives. I have a Canon flatbed scanner that does not do a very good job of scanning. Do you have any suggestions for me on scanners i could buy? Thank You for the video!! :)
Hi, did you buy the scanner? What did you take? Epson I have Canon? The Epsons are better. How do you find scans from negatives?
I thought the flash bulb setting is delayed because it takes longer for a flash bulb to fire compared to an electronic flash...thus your flash went off before the shutter opened....
Craig Diamond Correct.
I wonder if you ever explore what does the printer do to the image when it's going to print it. Because realistically printers can't achieve 777dpi. Don't know about inkjet, but offset printers max out between 300-400. And that's for glossy paper. Matte papers produce lower resolution. So I think that printer either up-reses or down-reses the input resolution depending in the image. And when that happens, inpun image resolution decreases slightly.
Just saying thank-you for thinking differently about creating images. Have a collection of negatives going back to the late 60s, most b/w. I have found something to keep myself occupied during the European Winter evenings.
Where can I get one of those negative holders for my scanner?
Danielle Roberson if your scanner is suitable for scanning negatives, it should have come with the holders.
@20:28 Deeper pixels were Invented by Ted Forbes :)
Just want to mention that scanning negatives with a DSLR (with a tripod, a macro lens and uniform light) is a really good way to digitize negatives too!
could you expand a bit more on that or give a link to more detailed info?
@@TheMrBennito There's nothing to expand.
It depends on what your printer will accept - most inkjet and services are leaning towards RGB these days. Always check.
My top tip for scanning is to get someone else to do it! I use a lab that charges £3 for developing and scanning any C41 film, with scans sent over the Internet and the negatives by return of post. I buy XP2 locally, and send it off when I'm done. The scans are about 4MB jpeg files; ok for playing around with, and they're easier to look at than contact prints.
Lots of my friends say it's "cheating", but I think farming out the bits you find boring is just sensible.
Chris Davies 4mb jpeg files, sounds like a lot of the quality is gone?
Good enough for a computer screen. If I want quality, I make prints.
would the scanner thats on top of my printer work?
Scanner model is a good start
It is not a regular office all-in-one scanner thing because they work taking a picture of the reflecting surface (paper facing down towards the light) instead of the light THROUGH the film as in the film scanner does... most film scanners have both functionalities (paper and film)... although there are some just for a specific use!
Just found your channel Ted. Love it, your videos are informative and fun. Thanks.
Jens Pi Thanks and welcome Jens!
No problem!
Can you actually use this program to upload your film~ photos to your computer, not just the metadata?
If you're refering to the Nikon F5 metadata, no.
It's just information recorded about the exposure, you'll need the scanner to scan your film and transfer your images, then it has nothing to do with the metadata.
Hope that helps you.
=D i love your videos . Im starting to take my first serious steps into photography and all your videos are awesome . Thanks for sharing your knowledge and love for your art .
Is Adorama a sponsor?
I absolutely Love watching your videos.
fantastic episode. thanks ted
Thank you so much for sharing this information, I always wanted to know how to do this.
Great episode!
There is a difference between DPI, dots per inch and PPI, pixel per inch; and people confuse them when print photos.
Why don’t you say that you need to develop the negative so you can scan it ??
Because that is rather self-evident? Film cannot be exposed to any kind of light until it is developed.
CasualProductions first people usually asking if it’s developed and yes it is developed !...
Beautiful work, great videos. informativ and entertaining.
Thank you
The Epson software isn't the greatest, so I usually use VueScan
Thanks! :) I think I'm going to research further before getting it....
Where do I find "The Art of Photography" on iTunes? I would like to get a paid subscription. These seminars are on par with The British Journal of Photography, in terms of the enjoyment that I derive from both of them!
This was sooooo useful! Now I can use photoshop like a real person! YES! even though it was Lightroom or whatever. But now I know curves :D
If the original was a COLOUR negative, then by all means I'd scan it in colour even if I wanted the end result in b&w so that I could change the tonality of each colour....
To me, it seems that scanning 120 negs is like ordering an americano in italy. You're taking something with inherent depth and beauty, and putting water in it. Can we see your darkrroom skills? Lets see some murial prints, and prints from positives.
Thank you very much Ted !
do you need chemicals first?
Youre videos are amazing - thank you so much!
can't you use a regular scanner? thx
Hey thanks for all your effort!
Oh, hell yeah. Drop dat knowledge.
Is this for pros--dark room ? NEXT !
Impossible dream with Epson scanner. I would need fourteen years for scanning my slides and negatives, and I am 70 y.o.
I see no problem!
@@MrSwaggernaut83 The problem is: A scanner will take 30-60 seconds per scan, depending on your resolution and computer. A DSLR or mirror-less camera setup will only take 1/125 of a second per "scan" with at least 10 times the resolution. I understand aldebaran question: I'm 71 and need to get this project done while I'm still cognizant and able to do it. You don't need the latest camera, I use a Canon 5D Mark III. There are many TH-cam videos showing how to do this. That's how I learned. Your mileage will vary.
@@MrKen-wy5dk haha yea I understand the issue, was just trying to be supportive and say age isn't an issue 😅 did a crap job of saying so though
it does'n sense to do this from photoshop is better to make Darkroom