Hi all,
I own an Epson V750 scanner, and i'm still trying to understand how to use it (the supplied documentation is somewhat skimpy...). I use the supplied Epson Scan Software, since the SilverFast 8.0 that i got keeps hanging and freezing on my Mac. My V750 vas NOT supplied with a Wet Mount at all.
I have followed several threads about Dry or Wet mounting, but no clear conclusion was to be found, si i decided to run an homemade test.
Let say that the Epson supplied negative holders are... something that Epson should be blushing about. No way, absolutely no way to keep a 4X5 flat with them; no way to mount a Rollei 80S on the supplied 120 mounts (the Rollei 80S is slightly narrower than normal, and drops down through the mount) while an FP4+ / 120 keeps curling up.
I have invested some $$ and purchased a Betterscanning 4X5 mount, with an ANR glass plate that does not produce Newton rings. Huge improvement, after spending a couple of hours defining the best focusing... Finally i succeded by making a very tiny scratch on a negative emulsion, and focused the scratch himself. I mount my negatives taping them on the ANR side, emulsion down, and "suspended" below the Mount.
At that point, only Wet Mounting remained to be tested... but before spending another bunch of $$$ i decided to investigate a bit.
There is a ScanScience solution, and i was perusing their catalog for a long while; but since i was unable to find any image of the mounts they offer (not a single one), nor an instruction manual on their website, i dropped the idea for the moment.
There is also the Aztec proposal; and looking here Economical Fluid Wet Mounting Supplies i found that i can actually use my Betterscanning dry mount with Aztec fluid, tape etc. and that will be a good saving...
But "was the game worth the candle", as we say in Italy?
So i decided to make a test, using what i had on hands: my Betterscanning 4X5 mount.
I took a well defined 6x9 negative, and scanned it as usual. Then, without changing any scanning parameter, i wet mounted it to the NON_ANR side of the glass using a few drops of Zippo lighter fluid, with the emulsion facing the glass and the negative "suspended" below the mount's glass. I taped it all around (after GENTLY squeezing out the air bubbles with a lint-free paper towel) using Blue Masking Tape, and i DID NOT superimpose a Mylar sheet, for the very simple reason that i had none; the negative was flat on the glass anyway, and it was not scratched on the back side, so i decided to avoid it.
Scanning was done at 4800 DPI, no "enhancements" at all, flat curve. No enhancements in Lightroom either.
I'll attach to this post two scanned jpg of the same negative, one dry mounted and the other wet mounted; and i'll attach two crops, so you can compare.
On my humble opinion, the Wet Mount is better. Non astoundingly better, but better it is.
And using the Zippo fluid, the whole process is not "too much" time consuming than the Dry Mounting. It's a matter of minutes.
After the scan, i removed the negative from the glass, gently blowed on it and the negative was dry and perfect in a matter of seconds.
Conclusion? I have already ordered a Wet Mounting Kit from KAMI (European outlet for Aztec, and original producer of the fluid)
I'll appreciate your comments!
Paolo from Italy
I own an Epson V750 scanner, and i'm still trying to understand how to use it (the supplied documentation is somewhat skimpy...). I use the supplied Epson Scan Software, since the SilverFast 8.0 that i got keeps hanging and freezing on my Mac. My V750 vas NOT supplied with a Wet Mount at all.
I have followed several threads about Dry or Wet mounting, but no clear conclusion was to be found, si i decided to run an homemade test.
Let say that the Epson supplied negative holders are... something that Epson should be blushing about. No way, absolutely no way to keep a 4X5 flat with them; no way to mount a Rollei 80S on the supplied 120 mounts (the Rollei 80S is slightly narrower than normal, and drops down through the mount) while an FP4+ / 120 keeps curling up.
I have invested some $$ and purchased a Betterscanning 4X5 mount, with an ANR glass plate that does not produce Newton rings. Huge improvement, after spending a couple of hours defining the best focusing... Finally i succeded by making a very tiny scratch on a negative emulsion, and focused the scratch himself. I mount my negatives taping them on the ANR side, emulsion down, and "suspended" below the Mount.
At that point, only Wet Mounting remained to be tested... but before spending another bunch of $$$ i decided to investigate a bit.
There is a ScanScience solution, and i was perusing their catalog for a long while; but since i was unable to find any image of the mounts they offer (not a single one), nor an instruction manual on their website, i dropped the idea for the moment.
There is also the Aztec proposal; and looking here Economical Fluid Wet Mounting Supplies i found that i can actually use my Betterscanning dry mount with Aztec fluid, tape etc. and that will be a good saving...
But "was the game worth the candle", as we say in Italy?
So i decided to make a test, using what i had on hands: my Betterscanning 4X5 mount.
I took a well defined 6x9 negative, and scanned it as usual. Then, without changing any scanning parameter, i wet mounted it to the NON_ANR side of the glass using a few drops of Zippo lighter fluid, with the emulsion facing the glass and the negative "suspended" below the mount's glass. I taped it all around (after GENTLY squeezing out the air bubbles with a lint-free paper towel) using Blue Masking Tape, and i DID NOT superimpose a Mylar sheet, for the very simple reason that i had none; the negative was flat on the glass anyway, and it was not scratched on the back side, so i decided to avoid it.
Scanning was done at 4800 DPI, no "enhancements" at all, flat curve. No enhancements in Lightroom either.
I'll attach to this post two scanned jpg of the same negative, one dry mounted and the other wet mounted; and i'll attach two crops, so you can compare.
On my humble opinion, the Wet Mount is better. Non astoundingly better, but better it is.
And using the Zippo fluid, the whole process is not "too much" time consuming than the Dry Mounting. It's a matter of minutes.
After the scan, i removed the negative from the glass, gently blowed on it and the negative was dry and perfect in a matter of seconds.
Conclusion? I have already ordered a Wet Mounting Kit from KAMI (European outlet for Aztec, and original producer of the fluid)
I'll appreciate your comments!
Paolo from Italy
