I find glassless holders and slide frames very overrated. It's far more important to have the negative as flat as you can. Glassless is never going to achieve that.
Use a drop of scanning fluid or just plain naphtha to get very little material to material optical loss or Newton rings.
If you want to get the best out of your photos and also quite important, aid alignment, flat is important.I have encountered no issues at all with varying sharpness across the frame using this method. I use f11 on the macro when capturing the single shots, so the DoF more than covers any small deviations from perfect planarity of the film. If I were shooting at 1:1 and stitching multiple shots per frame the issue may possibly be more relevant, but I haven't as yet bothered trying that.
Messing around with scanning fluids would only add mess and tedium to the process.
You are selling your 35mm frames very short if you think a single shot DSLR grab will do them full justice.
Medium format is of course a whole other story yet again.
I'm talking about 120 film. I don't shoot 135.
I find even a single frame from my D810 is enough to capture a huge amount of detail from the film. Certainly more than good enough for web distribution, and already superior to any results I've seen from flatbeds. If I was planning to make a huge print of a special shot I would go the extra mile to make a multi-shot stitch of it, but otherwise it is creating exponentially more work for very little gain.
If you want to get the best out of your photos and also quite important, aid alignment, flat is important.
You are selling your 35mm frames very short if you think a single shot DSLR grab will do them full justice.
Medium format is of course a whole other story yet again.
Any kind of good scanning fluid will evaporate without residue, and will in the end be much less bother than trying to work around buckling film.
Photography is in big part the art of cutting with view cones and DoF, and later culling your images heavily.
So the art of visual selection.
Getting down to one or two frames out of maybe a hundred, that are actually printed is this.
Having the ability to capture the full detail of the frame in those instances is important.
Keeping the film flat with medium format is impossible in free air.
Web sharing is something else entirely, since most images won’t be viewed at more than 8MP at best.
I get perfect negative scans from my Epson scanner with no correction. Lovely machine.
PE
As I understand it, scanner friendly films have no rough retouching surface or other such "pebbly" surfaces. This improves the scan quality by giving the scanner a smooth surface to act on.
PE
When you invert it does it also remove the orange mask ?I use darktable to invert and edit my scans, I don't think it has as many auto buttons as lightroom and negative lab but it does the job.
When you invert it does it also remove the orange mask ?
Sorry if this has been mentioned, I skipped the later few pages of this thread (and in fact I haven't visited this forum in what looks to be about 5 years). There are other (free) imagemagick based tools for inverting negative scans, for instance negfix8: https://sites.google.com/site/negfix/ and negative2positive: http://www.fmwconcepts.com/imagemagick/negative2positive/index.php
My workflow is in general scanning a 24bit tiff with a V600 as a positive with no adjustments in epson scan, and then inverting them using one of the two scripts. I'm still tweaking it to get a single repeatable process, but this is also not easy. I think that's because the response of the V600 isn't linear towards the ends of the spectrum and that creates color casts depending on how exposed the images are. I actually installed lightroom and NLP and compared it, but I got better colors out of negfix8 and my standard process is done on Linux with GIMP so I was pretty happy I didn't have to move it over to a windows machine with Lightroom/PS which I both dislike.
And doing a simple divide by orange and invert is not really working for me..
The color casts you’re seeing are actually the result of the three channels of the negative itself not having the same gamma. If you just invert and white balance the mask out you’ll still have color casts that progressively get worse with more density because each emulsion color has a slightly different characteristic curve and gamma that you have to account for, which in my experience, most tools don’t do a particularly good job with, and don’t give you a particularly easy way to deal with in the UI.
Where does the different gamma came from?
The three layers are supposed to have the same gamma by design.
There are other (free) imagemagick based tools for inverting negative scans, for instance
Which individual NIK product? The bundle is pretty pricey.#1 the scan isn't complete until it's post-processed...which involves personal judgement.
#2 try NIK. Its' better for many people than LR for post-processing because it offers a "ring-around" from which to select and do any further tweaking. It's great with neg color film. .
And this one https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/scantools-a-few-tools-to-help-with-film-scanning.161917/
I started this last year, and have left it be for a while I took some pics... I hope to add a release later with results of my work for colour.
This left the image rather low contrast and quite blue.
That to be expected the output will have a gamma of 1.0 so once you increase the contrast or created a curve that you like if will have the contrast you have chosen. The image still needs to be white balanced but that is a trivial operation, that can be done with a white balance dropper.
This will result in a pretty good image.
That version of the code does not have, matrixes that I created that I mentioned in an earlier post. I will release that later this year.
Which individual NIK product? The bundle is pretty pricey.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?