Are there any film recorders that do not require software?

[jsmoove]

Actually thats a good question, which has the highest resolution....a planetary camera, a film recorder, digital silver, or taking a picture of a 4k computer monitor?

 

[Craig75]

since barcodes are just straight black lines on a white background - it might be best using adox cms20 and strong rodinal - and its very easy to get a super high contrast negative with that combination which should be both extremely fine and sharp.

(that was my experience with trying to find a development time with agfa copex - which i *think* is adox cms20 - was very easy to blow the whole scene out and just get massive contrast while trying to find a pictorial time - but thats exactly what you do want in this situation)

 

[MattKing]

A 1200 dpi laser printer, some decent paper, and a good macro lens and a 35mm camera - preferably with a power winder.

 

[jsmoove]

@Craig75 Im thinking 2d barcodes if that makes any difference. Thanks for the info on the adox cms 20 though, didnt know about that. I like the idea of the digital silver technique you had mentioned because there would be no need to do the chemicals myself for a more precise image...but im not sure if the resolution is better with digital silver compared to a film recorder.

 

[jsmoove]

@MattKing Would a 1200dpi laser printer be of better resolution than a film recorder or digital silver print?

 

[MattKing]

@MattKing Would a 1200dpi laser printer be of better resolution than a film recorder or digital silver print?

The film recorders weren't/aren't particularly high resolution.
But it is your dual goals of saving the barcodes on film and minimizing the costs that lead me to the laser printer suggestion. The digital silver print would likely be more costly than the output from a laser printer. My 1200 dpi Samsung laser cost me about $125 CDN, includes a scanner and a fax and an ADF and uses very inexpensive toner.
What can you tell us about the barcode files that you are working with? File format, size? If the format is shareable and not proprietary, can you share one example? I could try printing it to see what you would get.

 

[calebarchie]

Hi everyone...the goal of the project is to store barcodes on film, so the more barcodes I can get the better. A film recorder would be ideal...but Im open to other ideas. Best resolution for cost is my #1 goal

And what is the purpose for having these barcodes on film? Do they need to be functional, decorative, enlarged, projected, archived?

Photographing a monitor you must deal with things like set up, magnification, flare, refresh rates etc. You must also take into account the RGB array and pixel pitch with regards to actual resolution achievable. All monitors are going to be different. Recorders usually have monochrome CRTs with an RGB filter wheel.

How many barcodes do you need?

 

[AgX]

How good would the slides be if you just copy the image displayed on a 4K monitor?

Actually some of the professional film recorders were based on a CRT screen.

 

[calebarchie]

^Yet they are very different technologies and also in their operation re recorder. The OP should just take a photo of one and go from there, its easy enough.

EDIT: Here are some numbers for the OP, this is the film recorder I have CRT based
http://www.promarketinc.com/pdf/agfaaltocolour.pdf

16K: 16 384 x 12 228px
8K: 8192 x 5464px

@16K flare is the limiting factor for resolution (not counting stupid exposure times) 8K is max practical limit. 4K monitors are 3840x2160 which you would have to divide by at least 3 so 1280x720px HD resolution.
These CRTs work by exposing the film line by line rather than sampled at once. Yes you will need software and deal with SCSI but it is relatively modern. MOPS has free trial software for and good info here (advanced section):
https://www.gammatech.com/html/35mmSlides.htm

Want to buy one?
http://mops-computer.biz/plson01_.htm

 

[3DJack]

jsmove, is this thread still live? I’ve got an Agfa PCR4; a 4k film recorder. That’s 4096 x 2730 pixels. I drive it from a modern PC with a SCSI card. Of any interest?

 

[jsmoove]

@3DJack You're selling it? I found a few digital to film (4k) services, both in the UK...First Call + CPC london. Having my own would be stellar...but im all the way in NZ and I probably cant afford to buy it off of you haha

 

[3DJack]

Hello jsmoove,
No, sorry the film recorder is not for sale, but I'd happy to put a film through it for you. What is it you're hoping to achieve? Why do you want to make a 35mm negatives or slides from a digital image? I use the film recorder for making 41mm x 101mm 3D colour slides; no one else does that! Do you work in black and white or colour? The machine only writes a positive image, so if you put negative film in it you get a negative. I always use reversal/slide film to give me a positive slide. Any use?
Regards,
Jack

 

[jsmoove]

@3DJack Do you have an email address I could contact you at? Im looking to do colour, and my project isnt exactly what you'd call normal haha, but itd be straight forward to make em im sure. Also it depends on where you're located, as im in NZ

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

They most likely need a drivers/software like most printers. I used an Agfa film recorder 20 years ago. If I remember correctly, it had a high Res BW screen. It made 3 exposures of R,G,B. It was a SCSI device and calibrating it was a PITA. I had to have the recorder expose color patches on the film, then process the film. Then I had to read the patches on a densitimeter. The readings were entered into software that was Mac OS 8 I think. The software then builds a LUT for the film. At best, it was mediocre. I would just avoid the film recorder and just shoot a HD screen with a film camera. It's an excuse to buy an 8K screen.

 

[3DJack]

@3DJack Do you have an email address I could contact you at? Im looking to do colour, and my project isnt exactly what you'd call normal haha, but itd be straight forward to make em im sure. Also it depends on where you're located, as im in NZ

Hello jsmoove,
Sorry for the delay; e-mail me at my junk address jackcolbran@mail.com, then I'll reply from my personal e-mail address; that will keep the spam at bay.
I've just cleaned the optics of my Agfa PCR4, so I want to put film though it to see how good the images are. If you send me images they must have lots of pixels to do justice; the PCR4 is 4096 x 2730. I'll use either Agfa CT100 or Provia 100F 35mm slide film; we suspect these are the same films anyway. I can post an un-mounted 35mm strip to you in New Zealand in an envelope.
Good luck,
Jack

 

[3DJack]

They most likely need a drivers/software like most printers. I used an Agfa film recorder 20 years ago. If I remember correctly, it had a high Res BW screen. It made 3 exposures of R,G,B. It was a SCSI device and calibrating it was a PITA. I had to have the recorder expose color patches on the film, then process the film. Then I had to read the patches on a densitimeter. The readings were entered into software that was Mac OS 8 I think. The software then builds a LUT for the film. At best, it was mediocre. I would just avoid the film recorder and just shoot a HD screen with a film camera. It's an excuse to buy an 8K screen.

My Agfa PCR4 self-calibrates and the results look fine to me. It has a LUT for each film type (about five, if I remember) and I've tried them all! The LUT for Agfa Optima 125 gives the most faithful results; the 1/3 stop over exposure is inperceivable to me. I usually struggle to fill a 36 exposure roll, so I might try some tests with the exposure minus 1/3 stop to see if the saturation improves.
We've all tried photographing monitors, projection screens, prints, etc., but the results are never as good as a 4k or 8k film recorder can produce.

 

[Chan Tran]

That's a common practice for making negatives for Platinum/Palladium prints and other Alternative processes and gives high quality results.




Not that good as the screen resolution is not as high as you think.

Ian

A 4K screen resolution is higher than all of the film recorder I know.

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

My Agfa PCR4 self-calibrates and the results look fine to me. It has a LUT for each film type (about five, if I remember) and I've tried them all! The LUT for Agfa Optima 125 gives the most faithful results; the 1/3 stop over exposure is inperceivable to me. I usually struggle to fill a 36 exposure roll, so I might try some tests with the exposure minus 1/3 stop to see if the saturation improves.
We've all tried photographing monitors, projection screens, prints, etc., but the results are never as good as a 4k or 8k film recorder can produce.

You sound like you got your film recorder fine-tuned. Are you running a SCSI film recorder?

 

[iandvaag]

We've all tried photographing monitors, projection screens, prints, etc., but the results are never as good as a 4k or 8k film recorder can produce.

Jack, I'd like to hear more about your experience of film recorders for making stereo slides. I primarily shoot medium format stereo slides (MF3D), and participate in several folios which circulate MF3D slides from a variety of artists. I've seen a couple slides produced by GammaTech which uses an Agfa Alto 16k film recorder. The slides were not bad, but they suffer from one of two problems:
-A significant loss of sharpness compared to in camera originals
-A visible dot matrix/scan line "grain pattern" which is not immediately apparent in regular 2D slides, but fuses in stereo, which is a distracting foreground texture.

Have you noticed either of these problems with your Agfa PCR 4?

I've tried to output digital images to slides by photographing my monitor (1600x1200 pixels) with a Hasselblad Makro 135 mm. Of course, the contrast buildup is a significant problem, but by reducing the dynamic range and "gamma un-correcting" the image (dragging the "Levels" midpoint slider to 2.2 in Gimp or photoshop), I've pretty much solved the contrast problem to my satisfaction. I plan to eventually write a script to properly linearize an sRGB image. The problem remains the limited resolution (or rather the visibility of the subpixels, which appear as chrominance noise in the image. It's not too terrible, but I'm spoiled by the quality of a camera original MF3D slide.

I'd love to hear your impressions of the 3D slides you've made with the Agfa PCR 4.

 

[Lee Rust]

I use a 6x9 camera loaded with color positive film to record images from my Mac laptop with 2880 x 1800 Retina display. Spot metering on the screen highlights determines the exposure and the focus and framing are carefully controlled with extension tubes and a tripod. I'm sure it would be better to have a bigger display like an iMac, but even with the laptop, the grid of the display pixels is just barely visible when the transparency is magnified in a loupe. These medium format slides are meant for casual direct viewing.

 

[calebarchie]

A 4K screen resolution is higher than all of the film recorder I know.

See my post above.

 

[AgX]

I'll use either Agfa CT100 or Provia 100F 35mm slide film; we suspect these are the same films anyway.

AgfaPhoto CT100 you mean.

 

[3DJack]

Jack, I'd like to hear more about your experience of film recorders for making stereo slides. I primarily shoot medium format stereo slides (MF3D), and participate in several folios which circulate MF3D slides from a variety of artists. I've seen a couple slides produced by GammaTech which uses an Agfa Alto 16k film recorder. The slides were not bad, but they suffer from one of two problems:
-A significant loss of sharpness compared to in camera originals
-A visible dot matrix/scan line "grain pattern" which is not immediately apparent in regular 2D slides, but fuses in stereo, which is a distracting foreground texture.

Have you noticed either of these problems with your Agfa PCR 4?

I've tried to output digital images to slides by photographing my monitor (1600x1200 pixels) with a Hasselblad Makro 135 mm. Of course, the contrast buildup is a significant problem, but by reducing the dynamic range and "gamma un-correcting" the image (dragging the "Levels" midpoint slider to 2.2 in Gimp or photoshop), I've pretty much solved the contrast problem to my satisfaction. I plan to eventually write a script to properly linearize an sRGB image. The problem remains the limited resolution (or rather the visibility of the subpixels, which appear as chrominance noise in the image. It's not too terrible, but I'm spoiled by the quality of a camera original MF3D slide.

I'd love to hear your impressions of the 3D slides you've made with the Agfa PCR 4.

Iandvaag,
Clearly you are more knowledgeable about imaging than I am. I have not tried adjusting the monitor image as you have; I just assumed that a monitor would never have the colour gamut of the film recorder. ...and in any case, I haven't got a 4k monitor, so the sharpness would never be there.
My first experience was sending images taken with a crop-factor Nikon DSLR (D5000) to digitalslides.com in the UK to make 35mm slides and I was hugely impressed by the results. As good as camera originals I thought, no "grain pattern"; but is was £4.20 per slide (2 x £2.10) so I bought the PCR4. Then I found that the results from my PCR4 weren't as sharp as digitalslides.com, but as I posted earlier (jsmoove) I've just found the optics needed cleaning, so I'm going to put another film through it now to see if I get sharper images. I suspect digitalslides.com use an Agfa Alto set to 4k; (and so do Gamma Tech) the CRT screen on the Alto is bigger than the PCR4 and the camera module is more complicated; maybe that gives a sharper result?
You do MF3D! Wow! What do you shoot with? Picture of my rig attached.

The UK stereo photo club "The Stereoscopic Society" are now only left with one 41 x101 folio group, and no one is doing MF. You've got a MF3D folio group in Canada? Cool. I though I was the only person on earth to this!
Anyway, even if I got my Agfa Alto working I doubt if it would ever produce trannies as good as a MF camera original. Where would I get the pixels from? I'd need at least 50M pixels to do even 8k justice.
The work you are doing to "correct" the monitor and make it suitable for photographing my obviate the film recorder. I would be very interested to see the results. Would I be able to run your sRGB linearize script? I'd have to buy a 4k monitor first!

 

[3DJack]

You sound like you got your film recorder fine-tuned. Are you running a SCSI film recorder?

Yes, I've got a Adaptec AHA-2940WCI SCSI card in the PC, and I run RasterPlus which requires a dongle. The dongle came with the film recorder. It all works very well. MOPS do a film recorder driver that doesn't need a dongle, and I think I tried it once, but I usually use RasrerPlus.

 

[3DJack]

I use a 6x9 camera loaded with color positive film to record images from my Mac laptop with 2880 x 1800 Retina display. Spot metering on the screen highlights determines the exposure and the focus and framing are carefully controlled with extension tubes and a tripod. I'm sure it would be better to have a bigger display like an iMac, but even with the laptop, the grid of the display pixels is just barely visible when the transparency is magnified in a loupe. These medium format slides are meant for casual direct viewing.

I view 35mm "digital slides" with a Realist Red Button viewer. I think the magnification is about x6 or x7, and they are coated achromatic lenses, so very demanding on the image.