DSLR-based 35mm film capture

[mshchem]

Have you actually, personally, used Nikon scanners? Nikon's slide duplicator is inherently inferior to their scanner due to lack of Digital Ice (ignore the misinformation about that) and the duplicator's introduction of yet another lens into the process (same reason an optical print cannot be as detailed as an inkjet print from a Nikon scan).

I have a little Nikon Coolscan V. I've never taken the time to figure out negative film, but it's amazing for my Dad's old Kodachrome slides. His old ASA 10 Kodachrome from that scanner will produce huge beautiful inkjet prints. Best scanner ever made.
It's one at a time for slides it takes small film strips, again I'm running Vuescan as Nikon software requires XP. I'm too lazy to figure that out.

 

[Nathan FilmNx]

Have you actually, personally, used Nikon scanners? Nikon's slide duplicator is inherently inferior to their scanner due to lack of Digital Ice (ignore the misinformation about that) and the duplicator's introduction of yet another lens into the process (same reason an optical print cannot be as detailed as an inkjet print from a Nikon scan).

Yes, I had a CoolScan 5000 with the film strip adapter, decidedly a more pedestrian (slow) process though I agree its a nice bit of kit.

I simply wanted something more standalone, timely, convenient, while retaining essential performance. I couldn't be happier with the quality of the resulting digital images.

-Nathan

 

[mshchem]

Yes, I had a CoolScan 5000 with the film strip adapter, decidedly a more pedestrian (slow) process though I agree its a nice bit of kit.

I simply wanted something more standalone, timely, convenient, while retaining essential performance. I couldn't be happier with the quality of the resulting digital images.

-Nathan

I think your machine is cool as can be. I showed my wife, she doesn't give a wit about this stuff. Even she could recognize the elegance of the setup. I don't scan much of anything but I really like what you have accomplished. Great talent!

 

[Cholentpot]

I'd very much like one of these.

I currently scan with a APS-C Canon and a 100mm macro, but I do have a Nikon 55mm macro that I can use too. This kind of thing would speed up my workflow and save my back/neck. Even if simplified as a way to advance frames it would be a major time savor. For now it's just in a negative carrier and I have to make sure each frame is positioned correctly and then crop in lightroom. If every frame is the same it's a cut and paste crop if any crop is even needed.

 

[warden]

Very nice work! I'll echo the other commenters who suggested a simpler version with no motor. While I don't care about speed even a motor-less version would be faster than a scanner.

 

[Nathan FilmNx]

I'd very much like one of these..

Very nice work! I'll echo the other commenters who suggested a simpler version with no motor. While I don't care about speed even a motor-less version would be faster than a scanner.

I think your machine is cool as can be. I showed my wife, she doesn't give a wit about this stuff. Even she could recognize the elegance of the setup. I don't scan much of anything but I really like what you have accomplished. Great talent!

Thanks for all the awesome feedback! Yes, the call for a simpler version is darn near unanimous and makes sense (though as you can tell, not my first impulse).

I've started to iterate a design that removes the automation while still having a mechanical advance to make frame alignment easy and keep our hands off the film.

What do folks think about keeping the backlight vs. taking that out (BYOL - Bring Your Own Light?)? My inclination is remove the LED but keep the defuser so that this could be purely mechanical and you could pair it with your favorite flash or light panel.. which if anything would often yield better results as the light would be inherently more diffuse/even coming from a more distant source.

-Nathan

 

[dabsond]

Thanks for all the awesome feedback! Yes, the call for a simpler version is darn near unanimous and makes sense (though as you can tell, not my first impulse).

I've started to iterate a design that removes the automation while still having a mechanical advance to make frame alignment easy and keep our hands off the film.

What do folks think about keeping the backlight vs. taking that out (BYOL - Bring Your Own Light?)? My inclination is remove the LED but keep the defuser so that this could be purely mechanical and you could pair it with your favorite flash or light panel.. which if anything would often yield better results as the light would be inherently more diffuse/even coming from a more distant source.

-Nathan

I am more in favor of a self contained version, like shown in the video. Of course, it would have to be more universal. Supporting Canon and other makers. Where do we sign up?

 

[L Gebhardt]

Thanks for all the awesome feedback! Yes, the call for a simpler version is darn near unanimous and makes sense (though as you can tell, not my first impulse).

I've started to iterate a design that removes the automation while still having a mechanical advance to make frame alignment easy and keep our hands off the film.

What do folks think about keeping the backlight vs. taking that out (BYOL - Bring Your Own Light?)? My inclination is remove the LED but keep the defuser so that this could be purely mechanical and you could pair it with your favorite flash or light panel.. which if anything would often yield better results as the light would be inherently more diffuse/even coming from a more distant source.

-Nathan

You've built something I've been thinking about doing for a while now. I'm a fan of the automation.

There's value in using a flash over white LEDs for better color rendering with slide film, though with newer LEDs it's only a small advantage. I would try for a removable LED light module so flash or another light could be used.

With color negative film I have found being able to color balance to remove the orange mask gives much cleaner scans vs balancing the colors in the raw file. I currently use a color head for this, but I am planning a solution with separate RGB LEDs controlled by an arduino for different film types.

Are you going to open source the project?

 

[mshchem]

Thanks for all the awesome feedback! Yes, the call for a simpler version is darn near unanimous and makes sense (though as you can tell, not my first impulse).

I've started to iterate a design that removes the automation while still having a mechanical advance to make frame alignment easy and keep our hands off the film.

What do folks think about keeping the backlight vs. taking that out (BYOL - Bring Your Own Light?)? My inclination is remove the LED but keep the defuser so that this could be purely mechanical and you could pair it with your favorite flash or light panel.. which if anything would often yield better results as the light would be inherently more diffuse/even coming from a more distant source.

-Nathan

YES . Everyone has access to light. Any DSLR can be set for various light sources. The 1970 version of your device is a Nikon PB4 bellows with a PS4 copier with the bellows lens. It has a holder for film strips (coiled) . It has a white acrylic diffuser, bring your own light. The mechanical film advance is the best feature. Have a base model variant that has the device with the power advance, let the user provide the light and trip the shutter. Each frame could be advanced by pushing the button. Offer a high end version for big money similar to what you have shown.

You should sit down with a couple of friends. Think about what all you can do. Think like 3M every technology they embrace is used across all their products.

Look at how everything Jobo has fits in with each product. It's like Legos. I don't know who designed the Jobo system back in the day but it's damn neat.

You're very talented, make sure you are solving the right problems.

 

[MattKing]

I'd suggest designing it without a light source, and automated advance, but with the ability to add snap in accessories that perform those two functions.

 

[Cholentpot]

I vote for bring your own light but leave diffuser in. Make it as simple as possible.

Check out how they scanned Robert Capa's 'Mexican Suitcase' photos. They built a rig and got the rebate in there too http://users.clas.ufl.edu/burt/Mexican Suitcase/The Mexican Suitcase_ Conservation Assessment.pdf

This is something I've dreamed of building. However your design is more practical as we're not dealing with old fragile film.

 

[Photopathe]

After some tests and comparisons I went from using LED panel (Kaiser Slimlite Plano) to using flash. Besides having better color rendition it's more powerfull so I can use faster shutter speeds eliminating the risk of loss of sharpness from vibration (downside of course is less convenience for framing and focusing as it's not a continuous light source). A couple of days ago a got a very convenient piece of equipment for the purpose of using flash as a light source for scanning (also useful when doing studio shooting): an AC power supply called Tronix Speedfire II. Virtually no recycling time and no more batteries.

 

[Karyudo]

Nathan, I stumbled onto this thread last night, and have signed up here at Photrio solely so I could comment on your fantastic project! I really like the "set the frame once manually and then auto-advance thereafter" user interface. I don't have a 3D printer, and I've already got various film holders, etc., so even apart from the whole system you've created, I'd love to see something like the auto-advance available as a Beseler Negatrans mod/add-on, or for Negative Supply's new MK1, say.

I don't know nearly enough about stepper motors and the like to make something like that happen myself, but I know enough about camera scanning to know you've got something here that a fair number of people would be interested in. (I'm actually sort of shocked that it's not more of a sensation here, to be honest....)

I would be pretty happy to read any and all descriptions/sources/parts lists/how-tos you could post about just the auto-advance portion of your project alone.

 

[etn]

What do folks think about keeping the backlight vs. taking that out (BYOL - Bring Your Own Light?)?

Nathan,
First, congrats for the project, it is REALLY REALLY cool - put me on the pre-order list too (plus a 2nd one for 120 film!)

About the BYOL topic: my vote goes for an integrated backlight. A backlight remains constant in intensity and color temperature, and makes the entire device easier to use. With a BYOL solution, one could either
1) use daylight out of the window: forget about repeatability! (being an engineer, I like repeatability )
2) adapt some sort of light box or flash: I imagine this could be complex and/or would require using the device in a non-natural position (for instance, if the backlight lies on a table, the camera needs to point down which makes loading the film more difficult)

My 2 cents.
Etienne

 

[Nathan FilmNx]

Nathan,
First, congrats for the project, it is REALLY REALLY cool - put me on the pre-order list too (plus a 2nd one for 120 film!)

Thanks Etienne! I'm on the same page regarding BYOL, I have an updated revision to share soon!

-Nathan

 

[etn]

Nathan, just giving second thoughts about all this:
I think making the system compatible with an existing standard could be good. For instance (just a suggestion and possibly not the best one), the adaptor ring of the Lee Filter system:
http://www.leefilters.com/index.php/camera/system

In essence, your system could adapt to the ring. Each user can then choose a ring according to the lens he/she wants to use. So you have one element less to design and virtually any lens can be used. The Lee system also adapt to uncommon lenses such as Hassy B60. (I, for one, have been giving thoughts for a while about using my Hasselblad macro lens on bellows to scan film. The announcement of the new CFV 50 ii back by Hasselblad only reinforces me in the idea that I might end up doing this at some point down the line, in a few years when it gets available second hand)

My 2 cents
Etienne

 

[etn]

Speaking of throwaway frames, does anybody find it advantageous to bracket exposures when scanning with a camera? I've only just begun the process with my D810, and am still undecided on the whole process. I've been using the -1/0/+1 sequence, but my post processing skills aren't yet at a point where I actually know what I'm doing.

This topic has just been discussed in the thread about scanning 120 film, see starting from post #55 here: https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/dslr-scanning-120-film.167447/page-3

 

[nikarlo]

I'm looking for a similar thing. I've made a slide digitizer with an old slide projector, but now I wish made a negative strip auto loader. What about your project, you'll publish as open source?
Regards from Italy
Carlo

 

[radiant]

Yeah, totally interested to print myself one! I wouldn't need the automatic system, manual transfer would be just fine.