Scanning Film Negatives - DSLR Vs. Epson V850 - Which is Better at Scanning Black and White film
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 26 มิ.ย. 2024
- If you would like to support this channel and continue to see future content like this, please consider making a small donation: distphoto.be/support_the_channel
In this video I compare two ways of scanning film negatives. scanning black and white film with a Canon 5d Mk iv Digital camera vs. an Epson V850.
I also compare the standard Epson Negative trays to the Better Scanning wet mount fluid mounting station.
I was a bit surprised by the results and did not think they would be so close.
Hope you enjoy!
DSLR Scanning Set Up - 01:16
Epson V850 Scanning Set Up - 05:19
Scanning Film Negatives - Conversions (Lightroom & Neg Lab Pro) - 11:56
Scanning Film Negatives - Comparisons - 16:16
=============================
Scanning Set up //
=============================
Lomography Negative Holder - adorama.rfvk.net/kjJ6oL
Smith & Victor Copy Stand - amzn.to/3ErTnyq
Artograph LED Light - amzn.to/3EpHN7d
Arca Swiss Quick Release Plate - distphoto.be/arcaplate
Canon 5d mk iv - distphoto.be/5dmk4
Canon EF 100mm Macro 2.8L - distphoto.be/100mmmacro
Smart Shooter 4 - distphoto.be/smartshooter
MacBook Pro - adorama.rfvk.net/x9zMN1
Epson V850 Scanner - distphoto.be/epsonv850
Epson Fluid Mount Station - adorama.rfvk.net/rnJM2v
Better Scanning Fluid Mount - betterscanning.com
Negative Lab Pro - www.negativelabpro.com
=============================
Go to digital camera setup //
=============================
Canon R5 - amzn.to/35FUX0r
Canon 24mm f1.4 L ii - amzn.to/3FAqfW4
Canon 35mm f1.4 L ii - amzn.to/3ioIBPl
Canon 50mm f1.2 RF - amzn.to/2N47Hax
Canon 85mm f1.2 - amzn.to/38PaH34
Canon 135 f2 L - amzn.to/3xaRnIi
Canon Drop-in Filter Mount Adapter EF-EOS R with Variable ND Filter - amzn.to/30O2ieX
=============================
Go to film photography setup //
=============================
Hasselblad 500 CM - ebay.us/I76k2J
120mm CF f-4 Makro - ebay.us/gX4UVm
80mm CF 2.8 - ebay.us/BRBAuT
50mm CFE f-4 - ebay.us/rcJhiz
Go to film - amzn.to/3oPiyTU
=============================
Music:
=============================
All the songs in my videos are from Epidemic Sound! - Get your music here - www.epidemicsound.com/referra...
=============================
Affiliate Links:
=============================
Some of the links in my video descriptions are affiliate links, which means at no extra cost to you, I will make a small commission if you click them and make a qualifying purchase. If you have a different purchase in mind, please consider using these links as it helps create more free content for this channel!
=============================
Follow Me:
=============================
Instagram: / distphoto and / distphotofilm
Lightroom Presets: www.distinctionphoto.com/dp/p...
Blog: www.distinctionphoto.com/dp/c...
Thank you so much for watching!
=============================
#distphotofilm #darkroom - แนวปฏิบัติและการใช้ชีวิต
Thanks. Really needed that head to head comparison.
Glad it helped!
I'm amazed at how close the scans are between the scanner and the camera, even with the wet mount technique.I had no idea cameras could be used for this task, but I live under a rock and don't follow tech. Great video!
I came across a blog post about 5 or so years back. I think it is gone now but I was really intrigued as well. It did not seem possible that it would do that well… but it does a great job and with cameras getting better this method will keep getting better.
Unfortunately film scanners are not getting the same r&d. Would be cool to see a new scanner like the Nikons 9000 be reintroduced to the market. We can only hope.
Thanks!
Great video as always! For my time, money, and effort, cam-scanning is the way to go. I've splurged a little bit and picked up the Negative Supply carriers. They are somewhat expensive (not any more expensive than a V850), but they hold the film absolutely flat and let you scan full rolls. Not affiliated with NS whatsoever, just a happy customer. Full rolls of 35mm or 120 in just a couple of minutes. There's also some wicked bright (but still high CRI) LED light panels out there that allow you to shoot at much faster shutter speeds so you don't have to mess around with MLU or shutter delay timers. Your L-bracket screwed to wall trick for leveling the copy stand blew my mind...so simple, yet effective.
I did look at the Neg Supply a while back but was a little sticker shocked… gonna revisit it though. If it truly lays the film flat and is that quick ( everyone raves about it ) it would be worth the money. Would be simple to do a quick scan of my film right after it dries before I cut it up. Seems super efficient.
Do you do the 120 and 35 mm with the same unit?
I am still shocked how well this method works.
Gonna have to do some comparisons with 4x5 film to see if I can justify my reasoning for ever buying the Epson :).
Wet mount and then DSLR scan sound like a interesting idea. 😃
My thoughts exactly!
Thanks for the video. I sold the Epson scanner and do scanning of negatives with the Fuji XT-4 and a Leica Macro lens. I do like the inkjet prints scanned with the camera much more.
But hey, nothing compared to a darkroom print of course!
For sure, thanks!
The real optical resolution of most v8xx scanners is 2700-2750 after finding the optimal height for thr holders, so I scan at 3200. The best affordable option for camera scanning is the "Essential Film Holder", which costs ~$100. For MF I stuck with the Epson, since bigger negs = bigger resolution. For 35mm I use the Primefilm XAs since it batch scans entire rolls at ~4300dpi (24mp). I do use camera scanning if A) the taking lens and film type warrant it and B) I plan to print big enough to need it. For example if you're shooting tmax 100 with a Sigma Art lens on 35mm. I have a dedicated Olympus E-M5ii I use for scanning 64mp 4:3 camera scanning of 645 and 6x8, and 48mp of 6x6. I have also rented an A7R4 a few times, which yields 190mp for 4x5:)
My biggest issue is time - camera scanning takes more. I shoot XP2 and Gold or Portra 90% of the time. Silverfast gets me 95% of the way there right out of the gate. Camera scanning, sure, faster in theory, but not in reality. I scanned 3 rolls yesterday of 35mm XP2 -on the XAs - it took me maybe 45 minutes total, including exif tagging, album creation, and gphotos upload. Camera scanning I'd still be removing dust right now😵💫
Great stuff, subscribed.
Thanks! I also have a Prime XAs scanner. I like being able to batch scan a roll. Then cut/archive it after. However I have gotten inconsistent results with the focusing. Just seemed the camera scans were consistently crisper. I had sashes the Prime away but will have to give it another go. Would love to see one of those Olympus scans 👍
Time right now for me is the biggest issue as well. Have had to send out dev/scanning on a few things… 🤷🏻♂️
@@DistinctionPhotoLLC I had to send out my XAS because I got inconsistent results on the first one. It seemed like the autofocusing was wonky. Ironically on the newer one I just disabled the auto focusing, and it actually performs the same if not better. Cheers.
@@jw48335 Thanks, I remember testing the different manual focus settings an that was inconsolable well. That is when I tucked it away. What setting fo manual focus do you have yours set at? I will have to figure that out as it is a nice scanner.
@@DistinctionPhotoLLC I used the Silverfast manual focus adjustment tool. I settled on a 7mm value for most films. I remember it's kind of at the extreme end of the focus. It makes a huge difference. It was significantly different between my two copies of the scanner too, where the sharp spot was.
@@jw48335 Thanks! That will give me something to start
I also heard that when camera macro scanning that facing the emulsion side To the camera is best and will illuminate any chance on ambient glare that you would possibly get shooting the shiny side. It makes sense as you would be shooting the actual film grain directly rather than through a layer of glossy celluloid... I believe all or most scanners are also set up this way so there would be no chance of getting any newton rings between the film surface, the scanning element and the glass in between.
That is very interesting… I feel more testing in my near future 👍 Thanks!
You are a master printer, look forward to seeing what you can do in the darkroom with it.
Thank you Steve! I am curious as to what I can do with it as well :)
It was difficult to see in the video but the Epson holders for 120 and 4x5 are designed in a way that the negative has to slide under the black "tongues" on either side. Only on the 35mm holder they are just held by the lid. Wearing gloves is a good start to "force" them under with a bit of downward pressure. For this it can also be helpful if the film is curved a bit. I usually start with pushing in one of the long sides first and use the curvature of the film to help me slide them under the opposite side. Once caught under the tongues the film can be flattened even without the lit closed.
I will give this a try, thank you. That does make sense. Just seems a bit awkward to get it done. Suppose there are probably directions somewhere I never bothered to read.
This would clearly make the edges of the scans sharper 👍
@@DistinctionPhotoLLC Not as awkward as it sounds. After a few negatives I actually found it a lot easier to do than holding the strip with one hand and closing the lid with the other ;-) One extra trick: If you want to get the neg out after scanning, just give it a short blow with a rocket blower from one of the short sides. The air will make the neg slip out on one side most of the times so it gets a lot quicker to take out again... I once did a whole video series about the epson and some tricks but it's in German and the auto translation is... well, not worthwhile I would say :-) By the way: Great channel!!! I like the style of your videos and even more your darkroom setup. After some years of improvising I hope to get a new big place started in 2022 ... too much stuff to install it all at home ;-)
I've scanned a little with my 850 Pro and I like the results. I have the wet scanning kit but I haven't tried it. The copy stand method seems like it would be easier, especially tethered.
With the copy stand method I just wish I had the space to have it set up all the time… that is the main reason I have been mainly using the v850 more. Looking into some of these transport systems for advancing the film under the camera… they are interesting 🤔
It’s the same here. Setting everything up is a terrible pain 😢
Great video. I have been using an Epson V750 for about a decade now. Throughout that entire time, I had been using the film holders as provided by Epson. However, I just recently began using the wet mount tray as I finally learned how to use it. I never used it before because my Epson scanner did not come with any instructions on how to use it, and I thought it was wet and messy so I never got around to it. That being said, I am very happy with using the wet mount and the V750. And being that I have all of that paid for, I think that’s where I’m going to continue until it breaks. One other thing, though, is the option of taking multiple photos of the negative, and then stitching those photos together in Photoshop. Have you ever considered that? That seems to be a more practical way of trying to get the most out of medium format scans.
I put off using the wet mount for a long time thinking it would be messy and make a muck of my film. Not so at all. Just the fluid fumes that get to me now. The Epsons do do a really great job and mostly use it for my negs.
I do not have a ton of room and always have to set things up if I want to use my camera.
I have never needed that much resolution as to stitch multiple frames together. It does seem like it potentially could do an amazing job. Maybe for certain negs but dektol a workflow prob for every frame kinda stuff. Thanks!
@@DistinctionPhotoLLC I learned to make my own mounting solution (hint: look up the MSDS for the stuff you have, and it gives you the ingredients); 1/10th the cost, and I use odorless mineral spirits so not too much of an odor.
Also, I too have limited space, and if I were to set up a camera scanning station, it would simply take up too much room. At the end of the day, while I acknowledge that DSLR scanning *might* be slightly better, for what I do (hobbyist at best!) I am simply satisfied withe V750.
Thank you very good video.
If I may ask you, does the Lomography DigitaLiza prevent the Negative curls after fixing it in?
Yes, it does a great job. Once in a while it will pop out and you have to watch the edges but overal really good 👍
This echoes my experience. Although I only have a V550. The big winners for me for preferring DSLR over scanning are that 35mm images are much, much better when shot with the camera. Night and day better. Whereas I could see almost no difference with 120 negatives. Also, I invested in the Valoi system and this allows you to 'scan' a roll of film in minutes. I have it tethered to my PC, and when using Negative Lab Pro, it all becomes very time efficient.
Does the Valoi system allow for 35mm & 120? I will have to look into this. Need a quicker efficient workflow for scanning full uncut rolls 👍
I was a bit surprised at how close they were once sharpened. I think that I would have that infrared cleaning on by mistake in the past and would see my scans being pretty soft compared to camera scans. Turning that off makes a huge difference.
@@DistinctionPhotoLLC Yes it does. It is a modular system, so you can spend what you can afford. But I have purchased the whole solution including the integrated light, so it doesn't look so thrown together like most DSLR scanning systems. The "Duster" is brilliant. These are anti-static brushes you pass the film through and it really does get rid of a lot of specks. It is an expensive solution though, although cheaper than the Negative Supply solution.
It looks that the scans from the Epson 850 on the wet mount are slightly sharper and have better tonality. Maybe the tonality on the Canon could be adjusted with curves. Thank you for your time and effort.
Yeah it is so close and with tonal adjustments feel either look quite good.I did prefer the flatter look of the Canon but that is pretty subjective
Thanks for making these videos. They are extremely helpful. I have a Perfection Photo 750. I am considering buying the 35mm and 120 v850 trays because they have anti newton ring glass and a way to make height adjustments. My 750 trays have neither. This will cost me $150. That's like almost half way to the price of a dedicated 35mm film scanner by Plustek. I'm not necessarily looking for the cheapest way to do this but I'd be bummed if after having spent $150, I would have been happier with a dedicated film scanner. Any thoughts?
I think having the adjustment on the trays would be quite helpful for getting the best quality scans. To me it would be worth the investment. However Look for other opinions as I have not directly used either the 750 or after market trays( unless they are identical to the stock 850 trays) Can not talk to the plaster scanner either but think it is 35 mm only? Anyway wish I could be more help but do feel the adjustments would be worth it!
For checking Epsons perfect focal plane do several scans on several focal heights.
Don't apply any effects.
Save all scans as jpg /best quality.
The scan of largest file size will be the sharpest (more grain detail has to be saved).
Great Tip Thanks!
The native resolution of the sensor in the 850 is 3,200ppi but you need to add some clarity value in LR or USM to clean up the tiny 'circles of confusion' haze from the scanner optics.
Still do not see any gain of quality but am not using test targets either. Might have to break out the air force target again 🤔
you can't gain back any details lost at capture stage. any sharpening (reverse convolution magic) only raises contrast and creates fake details which make image appear more detailed.
why not just use an AI upscale - it can give you much more fake details and resolution ! ))
Epson scanners can't give more than 2000dpi of actual usable information on the output.
Most tests indicate that the real resolution you can expect from a V850 is somewhere above 2000dpi. Never seen anyone claim above 2500dpi, but many claim that you get slightly better results by scanning at something like 4800 dpi and then downsizing to 2000 or 2400dpi than just scanning at 2400dpi.
For curly film I use tweezers and gently push down between the frames while closing the film holder, but I'd guess cotton swabs would work equally well (or better).
Most Canon cameras have MLU by default if you're in live view as long as you use live view AF.
That is right about where I found the best image so it makes sense. I feel like I am not steady. Thanks!
After watching this video I was a bit confused about the results.
I use a V850 and scan at a higher DPI than you did here in the video. In the past I tested which DPI works best for me (disk space vs. quality vs. time vs. workflow). I just redid the test you did and scanned at a higher DPI & resized to get the same size as the 2400 DPI scan. All higher DPI scans are significantly sharper after resizing with somewhere between 3200 and 4800 showing the overall best compromise. The 6400 DPI scan was still the sharpest. Scanned as TIFF-DNG in 16 Bit Grey using the TMax 100 - CI .50 color profile. In my experience this worked much better than the NegativLabPro conversion for black & white images.
Were you using Vuescan? Or Silverfast?
Everything I have tried has put straight scanning at 2000 was to my eye the sharpest the scanner can do. I could be wrong and if you are getting better results that work for you that is great!
So the sharpest scans you get are scanned 6400 DPI (are they Tiff or DNG or does it not matter?) in 16bit Greyscale and than you resample in Photoshop down to 2400 dpi? Would like to try the exact process you are using.
I do love the V850 and think it is very capable and If I can get better results out of it would Love it. Thanks!
@@DistinctionPhotoLLC I’m using Vuescan as well. It’s possible that the differences are more apparent in my test since I used HP5 in 35mm. Medium format is obviously much sharper from the get go and tougher to judge the increase in sharpness.
The scans were all .DNG, but vuescan calls this option TIFF-DNG. I didn’t test wether or not it makes a difference to use one or the other.
I scan as 16 Bit greyscale and use the TMax 100 CI .50 as a baseline with extreme values automatic to select the corresponding white and black points. In a sense I’d describe it as a straight scan compared to a straight print. Afterwards I tweak the curve in camera raw/Lightroom/photoshop. I resize the image and smart sharpen (17%, 1.2px radius).
If you want I can share samples and screenshots of vuescan via email.
@@akaYu07 yeah that would be great… might be the format size… also I was scanning in 48 bit RGB so that might have some effect as well
@@DistinctionPhotoLLC Possible. I'll send a mail to infoat...ok?
@@akaYu07 perfect 👍
Always use the 'natural' resolution values of a scanner's sensor array: 1200, 1800, 2400, 3200 and 4800ppi. Always mask out around any extraneous light bleeding out around film holders as that light will flare into the scanner and camera optics and degrade any details in the dense areas of the film reducing the dynamic range of the image captured!
Thank you!
Thanks for the video, youtube compression destroyed your video. Would like to see jpegs of this if possible. Also if you could borrow an a7RIV and try to do this with pixel shift would really be interested in the results. Thank You! Also would be interested in color negative and diapositive film scanning with HDR optinon
Sorry to hear the bad resolution. That sucks… the pixel shift is interesting…
Try the Essential Film Holder with HP5. It flattens it extremely well. Reasonably priced and designed by a British engineer, it works great for camera scanning. You can get "film borders" by ordering special Essential Film Holders, but the ADD FLARE and REDUCE FLATNESS, so I don't use them. Try the Viltrox L-116t video light under an Essential Film Holder. It's 95 CRI, inexpensive, and works great with B&W negs, color negs, and color transparencies. The diffuser is in the EFH, a necessary part of a rig using the Viltrox light. Look up Hashem at the "Pushing Film" channel here to see these things in action.
I will take a look, thanks!
You are putting the film in upside down in the epson trays. Put the emulsion up when you are loading. This does two things. 1 the high edges of the curve sit under the part you fold down and clip into place. Flattening the negative. Two when you turn over the tray and put it into the scanner, the emulsion is facing the scanner. You want this so that the scan sees the emulsion directly and not through the Film base. The light in the scanner comes from the top and shines through the base of the film and the scanner sees the emulsion.
I have tried it both ways.
I did not see any difference but was going with the guide on the carrier thar I believe means to put the emulsion up.
I am referring to the little graphic that has an abc and then an abc reversed with a line through it. If I put the emulsion down in the tray the image is reversed. I took the graphic to mean that this is wrong. Am I misinterpreting this?
I will have to give it another shot the other way…. What your saying makes sense. Thank you!
A lot of people do not realize that you can adjust the height of the Epson film holders and it makes a difference. I use a piece of ANR glass to flatten out my 120 film. 35mm I have a dedicated scanner. If you really want the best send out for a drum scan.
Yes, adjusting the film holders does make a huge difference… I have seen people just scan directly on the glass and would imagine the results are quite soft… never tried it. I have had lab scans done but wondering if you have recommendation for lab with quality drum scan? Thanks!
@@DistinctionPhotoLLC search for Alex Burke. He does large format photography and doees his own drum scans. He also offers drum scans as a service.
@@jjuarez83 Thank you! Will do 👍
For information, the optical ( true resolution ) of a V 700 or V 800 series scanner is roughly 2400 dpi. But to get this 2400 dpi, one must scan at max interpolated resolution and then downsample the file to hopefully get rid of most of the duplicated pixels. Although Epson's scans look inferior to the digitized files of the camera ( a DSLR does not scan but it makes a digital file, a photograph, of the negative ), but this is only for small size negs and to some extent MF negs. The primary culprit is the light dispersion due to the flat uncoated glass bed. Given a 4X5 neg or larger Epson comes alive and it is a god send to large format photographers. There is a way of compensating for the loss of clarity in Epson scans.
optical res of all Epson scanners are about 1700-1800dpi ) any number higher is just a measurement trick.
@@vasyapupken The resolution is higher than 1800 dpi. The 2400 dpi was derived from tests using USAF resolution charts and not some arbitrary method, or visiual inspection. FWITW, the same tests proved that the true optical resolution of Nikon Coolscan ED scanners is actually the claimed 4000 dpi, and that of the Minolta Scan Elite ii rougly about 3900 dpi despite the claimed 5400. The resolution of a lot of these Chinese scanners with fantastical figures of 8000 or 10000 dpi, were all found to be anywhere from 2600 to 3200 dpi depnding on the make and the model. The other factor is the D Max that comes into its own when scanning old transparencies , in particular Kodachrome. Besides drum scanners, Hasselblad, Nikon and Minolta the rest of them including Epson have a tough time with Kodachrome scans.
Thanks! Have some large format negs I need to scan and will be putting the Epson to work!
@@vasyapupken NO, it is much higher than 1800 dpi. Both the optics and the sensor are capable of much higher resolution that you have stated, but this is lost in scanning through plain glass. The rough figure of 2400 dpi was obtained by scanning USAF 1951 Resolution Target Cards. So 2400 dpi resolution is a verified figure, and not conjured up from thin air. The other factor is the lack of auto focus. With Epson one could get lucky and the focus height above the glass can correspond with the Neg holder settings, otherwise it is just guess work, unless one of the Better Scanning holders is employed, and even here the process of fine tuning the focus is tedious to say the least.
Do you have any experience with dedicated film scanners like e.g. Nikon Coolscan 9000 or Imacon as compared to the flatbed scanner?
No, not first hand... I have seen scans and they do seem impressive though.
Clean McKinnon
This is all I’ve been thinking about for weeks. I’ve tried getting the best scans from my NYC negs I shot 20 years ago, also on Epson. And I’m just disappointed. They don’t reach the sharpness that I know is in the neg (Leica glass and small apertures). I’ve got a Canon macro on the way and an Essential Film Holder and if it’s even an iota sharper I’ll be happy. I have thousands of negs I want to rescan and I’m just done with the flatbed carriers. For 8x10 I’ve really enjoyed it but my 35mm stuff needs a less cumbersome method.
I think you will be much happier with these results.
For me one of the biggest things is that I KNOW the lens is focussed at the best possible plane of focus. where with the flatbed. I test and test... and test but am never 100% confident it is at the sharpest plane of focus... which is irritating for how much time it takes to test this.
With my canon and Macro ( set it at f - 7.1) I use Auto focus and set the camera to auto WB and AV mode and it grabs focus very well. Some people use manual focus (whatever works!)
I have more confidence in this way and that makes a big difference in my mind.
You could try shooting through the emulsion side as well as it might give better sharpness. Especially for those Leica negs and small Aperatures.
I am on the fence about this still and am going to do a follow up vid with a better film / scene and probabally a test target as well. So you might find that interesting when I get it done.
Hope it goes well!
I also use a 5D mkIV to scan my 120 negs. Notably more sharper than a flatbed. I don't think I will ever use an epson anymore lol.
I think the flatbed still has an advantage for Large format... Have not tried Camera scanning 4x5 but might do the comparison there as well... But anything smaller and I agree!
In case this helps at all: your R5 doesn’t have a mirror and thus no mirror lockup. If you wanted to maximize the “sharpness” of your photo I would recommend electronic first curtain shutter shooting the emulsion side of the film. You can shoot electronic shutter but this will lower your dynamic range and has no real benefit over ECFS as far as vibrations are concerned if you were worried about that.
Oh also, the highest resolving power of the V850 is by scanning at 6400 dpi. You resolve about 2300 dpi of actual data at this resolution. So I just resize after capture to 2400 dpi. If you scan initially at 2400 in vuescan just make sure it’s doing a Down sample and not a pixel bin.
Thanks, I always wondered what the advantage of first curtain shutter is... So the quality and dynamic range are the same in first curtain and mechanical than and lower in electronic?
@@DistinctionPhotoLLC Thats correct. Its because of the Analog to Digital converters used in each. The EFCS and Mechanical shutter use the 14 Bit A&D converters (Unless on H+ mode because then its 13 bit for whatever weird Canon reason) and in Electronic its 12 Bit. Its not a humongous difference but there really isnt a benefit so why not?
Regarding the Lomography Digitizer film holder: You got the order wrong in this video! You open the film holder and place the bottom half of the holder onto the metal plate. Then you put the film in. Then (before you close it) you clamp the film flat with the black presse piece. With that in place, you close the film holder over it. It will grab the film by it's edges magnetically. Gently pull off the black presser and the metal bottom will be released too.
Huh, thought I was following the directions that came with it correct. Whatever I did the film was held very well at thedges and seemed to work correctly, I will have to take a closer look. Thanks!
Although the camera scans seem a little sharper than the Epson V850, when you bring convenience into the mix, the Epson comes out on top(IMHO). The problem I had with trying to scan negatives with my camera was the lighting. it always seemed to change ? Maybe a more elaborate lighting system would have helped.
I think it might depend on ones situation. If I have to set everything up everytime then the camera becomes less convenient. If I can leave it set and ready go I find it more convienient, however I can not always leave one of my cameras on the copy stand.
The lighting has been consistent for me but have bought 2 quality light tables. Never tried a cheaper one iPad,etc... so that could be a prob I imagine.
Skip to 16:40 for comparisons
I use a Epson 4990 and with wet Mount at 3200 there is a difference between 2400. At 4800 I didn’t see a difference. I would think you should be able to see a difference between 2400 and 4800 on a V850.
To my eye the file gets bigger but gains no better resolution of detail. 🤷🏻♂️
Thanks very much, Just a personal comment, why do you need the background music, its only me but it drove me crazy.
Your welcome. Noted 👍
Just use the extensive controls in the Epson v850 software to make perfect black and white 16bit scans at 3,200ppi rather than flying blind trying to convert negs to positives after scanning.
Thanks for the input. I have done this but tend to like the conversions from raw scans quite a bit better. That has been my experience.
I wonder if a iso 100 film that gets copied a 24mp and a iso 400 double the mp turn out the same quality.
Going to give a different look for sure ... Very interesting question, though I think you need to define "quality"
Scanning on a flatbed all the way. Tried both, DSLR scanning is good but all the converters out there like NLP are incapable of doing consistent colors for scenes...even the new 3.0.x version. Its a pain because the algorithm they use is so scene Dependant. Viescan or silver fast are robust.
Scan to a 16bit DNG and its essentially the same thing as DSLR scanning. Don't scan to a tiff.
Thanks for the input… for 4x5 I use the flatbed and have been using the song with silver fast as someone else suggested.
I mostly do black and white and do like camera scan and NLP for that but have noticed more inconsistent results like you said with color films… next color I shoot will see how it goes with Silverfast.
I ditched Vuescan for the simple fact that I do not want another subscription and they went that route for what is worth..
3:35 you put the shiny side up, i guess as a mistake, this could be misleading for users starting out.
You're not supposed to take a photo through the film because of birefringence.
So what does that look like? Loss of sharpness. Loss of contrast.
Someone else brought this up so I shot the image through the base and see absolutely no difference other than it is now backward.
What difference should I be looking for?
@@DistinctionPhotoLLC you can look up the effect. Also reflexions can be a problem when the shiny side is up.
It doesn't matter if you personally can see the effect if there is a correct way to do it and you want the best possible outcome ;)
@@inevitablecraftslab agreed, just wondering what this actually would look like to know if it is happening. Thanks!
FYI: 3 6x7 negatives will not fit at all in the epson trays. Its rage inducing. Absolute fail on Epsons part, especially since there is plenty of unused space in these trays to make the negative window the extra few cm longer so they will fit.
That does seem like a screw up on Epson’s part. Especially if it is that close… it has been awhile since shooting 6x7. I will have to look at some old negs but I think I had 3 rows of 3 and than 1 strangler in my sleeves? Not sure if they made/ make good sleeves for 5 strips of 2 🤔 Either way your right.
Very cumbersome to scan 6x7 I’m Epson as 3 frames won’t fit the holder. 6x9 are fine as cut in 2 frames for the sleeves works fine. For 6x7 to use in Epson mount you need to cut the in 2 frames and use 2 sleeve pages to store 10 frames (as one page holds only 4 strips). I ended up using Lomo Digitaliza with a 2-3mm craft foam underneath to compensate for focus plane.
Epson vs DSLR is silly. Try Nikon 9000 vs DSLR
Would love too… have been looking at them for awhile but the lack of support has been a bit of concern for how much they are going for… Really wish they were still in production!
Does your camera come with dust and scratch removal software... no. Does your camera allow you to scan multiple photos in one go... no. Will buying a dedicated high resolution camera, a macro lens, and a film holder be cheaper than buying a scanner... no. Go with the scanner, only, and I mean only if you see yourself ever shooting more than 40 rolls of film. As the lab price to scan 40 rolls of film is the same as the price to buy this scanner. This is not something for a hipster 4 roll a year film shooter. This is something for a dedicated film photographer who looks to scan medium format and looks to start the road to digital prints, and high res digitally edited photos. If you are a true artist you will skip scanners entirely and go directly to analog printing... but at that point you would be probably best using a dedicate labs facilities on loan.
you 'scan' with a scanner - you 'digitise' with a digital camera!
Indeed 👍
Way too dark, my friend.
To each his own 👍🏻