Can a scanback be used with a fieldcamera?

Hi all,

I am thinking of buying a second hand scanback for LF for reproduction purposes. Now most of these backs (Betterlight, PowerPhase) have originally been developed for use with studio type LF camera's (Sinar, Cambo), but can they be used with wooden fieldcamera's using springbacks as well?? (I own a Tachihara 4x5, so any experiences with that are highly appreciated).

I am especially worried that the actual scanbed, which is probably thicker than a film cassette, will simply not "fit", but are there any other potential issues I need to worry about :confused:

Marco
http://www.boeringa.demon.nl

I thought about this as well. The answer I came to is, yes, probably you can put a scanning back on just about anything, and it's not going to be too complicated to make an adapter if one doesn't already exist.

But... (and this is a big but) take a long hard look at the exposure times you're up against with these scan backs. If you're in a studio environment with a rock solid cambo and camera stand, that's one thing. But anything but the best-designed wooden field camera*** may not have the overall stability to deliver the kind of results that you expect based on the resolution capabilities of the back. I think that'd be a really big issue for me. I imagine myself schlepping a 20lb+ rig into the field just for the sake of stability over several seconds of exposure.

Frankly, if I were to invest the time to machine an adapter for a scanning back I would make it very precisely from metal and it would be designed to mate a precisely machined metal camera e.g. my cambo.

So my preliminary diagnosis, so far, is that a scanning back probably isn't compatible with my own idea of a lightweight field camera.

I am looking more seriously at a ZD back now. But I did think about a scan back on an rb67, that might well be beast enough for stable field work.

*** I certainly do not mean to imply inferiority of your Tachihara, I haven't used one myself.

Thanks Keith,

No, I do not feel offended at all, your idea's and remarks are all to true. However, I am not thinking of actual field work with this back. I want to use it to reproduce my prints made in my darkroom. Unfortunately, these are to big to scan on any affordable consumer type flatbed scanner (I print up to 40x50cm). Since I do not yet own a digital SLR, and find these in a sense a disgrace to my 4x5 based prints, I thought of the scanning back, as it will allow me far higher resolutions than can be achieved by any digital SLR (well, not regarding spending $8000,- or so on Canon's latest model, and that doesn't even include a lens :rolleyes: ).

I want the high resolution as I a contemplating using the digital images for huge digital enlargements of the original prints (maybe 2 meters wide). The results of a 12MP SLR just won't be enough...

Of course you might ask: "Why not scan your negatives?". Well, unfortunately I tone many of my prints (sepia, selenium etc.) and recently started developing with a brush. A lot of fun, but all of these effects need to be reproduced, so a plain scan of a negative is not a substitute.

Ah I understand! Well I think it sounds good. How about this solution though: get a cheapo LF enlarger, mount the print under that, mount a good lens, and voila, the ultimate, superstable, well aligned copy camera to take high-res photos of prints of almost any size. I guess then you just need a good ring flash or such.

Just a thought.

I like the idea, especially that, like you say, I would than have a stable as well as perfectly aligned copy setup ready for use.

Just two things that are an issue (not to downgrade the great idea, I am just being wholy practical here):

- I don't have room for yet another enlarger / permanent copy setup (I already have a Durst L1200 and 670BW). Unfortunately, I live small...
- As some other creative outbursts, I have painted and sculpted as well during the past years, I would like to be able to reproduce those too. Fitting a painting of 1.5 meter beneath the copy stand is likely to cause an issue.

Imho, I have been thinking of getting a cheapo MF camera body instead. There are scanbacks for these too, and this might both be more flexible, reliable and easier to use setup (compared to the Tachihara). Flexible, but not as easy as the copy camera setup you suggested. I have seen an advertisement for a 2nd hand scanback for a Hassy.

Marco
http://www.boeringa.demon.nl

If you are going to buy a NEW scanback, then you could probably get all your questions answered directly from the manufacturer.

But as said, you can probably make any camera fit the back if you are willing to make adapters.

The betterlight scanback just slides into the springback of a 4x5 camera and does not use the graflok attachments. I have shot with the Super-8K many times in a Deardorff 5x7 w/ a 4x5 springback on it.

The problem is not getting a proper fit of the back. It is:

1) stability as mentioned above. You are talking about exposures of 1-3 seconds often and the more solid the total platform the better. When I use a Betterlight back i do so on my Horseman rail camera with a Majestic head on Cambo stand and even that is not the best solution ... a camera with a U or H frame would be even better. The horseman frame is massive but the back is heavy and could sag a little.

2) the sag mentioned above coupled with the weight of the back v. that of a lighter wooden field camera is a disaster waiting to happen. I have used the Betterlight with a Toyo AII.

Marco

A $1700 US DSLR (with a macro lens) will make an excellent all-purpose copy camera for your prints. Not for making a 2 meter (huge) enlargement, obviously.

But if you want to go the scanback route, Betterlight IS excellent. And a Crown Graphic (with no movements) would be a VERY practical way to go.

All you want is an old fashioned copy camera, and have no desire for movements.

If all that is needed is a digital copy camera, you could probably construct a sliding wooden box for a camera. Should be able to make one of those extremely sturdy! May not look as impressive as a nice camera with a tapered bellows, but I bet it would work as well or better.

Marco B said:

...Of course you might ask: "Why not scan your negatives?". Well, unfortunately I tone many of my prints (sepia, selenium etc.) and recently started developing with a brush. A lot of fun, but all of these effects need to be reproduced, so a plain scan of a negative is not a substitute.

Click to expand...

Hi Marco,

Another suggestion: you could take slides of the prints with your LF camera, and scan these slides.

Greetings,

Dirk

Hoi, another Delftenaar?