Everything But The Scanner

[wjlapier]

I have all I need to shoot 4x5 but a scanner. I know I don't need a scanner to shoot 4x5, but for all other formats I shoot I scan the negatives from 16mm to 120. I use a V500 and have a V600 available if the V500 dies. I might consider a Epson 4990 if I could find one in great condition with the trays. Right now I can't spend the money to buy a V700 or V800.

What are some of you 4x5 shooters using to scan your negative? I've seen one example where the negative is scanned twice and stitched together, and I might consider that.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

You don't need a scanner - you need a 4x5 enlarger. Harumpf...

 

[jeffreyg]

I used an Epson 4870 similar to the 4990 for many years until a lightning surge fried it. Now I have a V850pro. A properly functioning 4990 or if you can find 4870 should work very well for your 120 and 4x5 negatives. Actually I liked the holders better than the ones for the 850 which holds only one strip o 3 frames. All my previous negatives were strips of 4 so I have to cut one frame off if I want to scan them.
There are other features with the 850 but I haven't noticed any real differences in the end results. I use (used) SilverFast 8 Ai Studio software with both.

http://www.jeffreyglasser.com/

http://www.sculptureandphotography.com/

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

You could contact print chemically and scan the print with your V500. I think those might look very neat.

 

[gone]

An Epson 2450 will do a great job if you can find one that still works well. They're cheap, but will probably not like to run on anything older than Win XP. I didn't have the neg trays and just taped the negs to the glass (35mm you can tape a whole strip down, but one frame at a time is the way to scan them). My scans were sharp! A 4x5 neg scanned at the real optical resolution of 2450 is huge. Your 35mm scans can be printed nice and sharp up to 12x18. I did test once between the 2450 and a Nikon Cool Scan V ED using the same neg and honestly, once the scans were edited in PS, the differences were minimal other than file sizes.

 

[Don_ih]

I have an HP something or other that can scan up to 8x10 - but it's not exactly great, for whatever reason. I have an Epson that will scan 4x5 but don't have the trays - I put the neg emulsion-side down on the glass to eliminate Newton rings - it does fine. But I pretty much just enlarge 4x5 and then take a picture of that to post to Instagram or Facebook. Of course, if I was going to do "serious" computer work on the image, I'd use the Epson.

 

[halfaman]

I use an Epson V700 and it is more than enough for me.

 

[jamesaz]

Hi, I have a microtek i900 that I bought used off Craigslist maybe 10 years ago. I don’t do a lot of volume but it keeps chugging along.

 

[Minolta93]

I used an Epson 4870 similar to the 4990 for many years until a lightning surge fried it. Now I have a V850pro. A properly functioning 4990 or if you can find 4870 should work very well for your 120 and 4x5 negatives. Actually I liked the holders better than the ones for the 850 which holds only one strip o 3 frames. All my previous negatives were strips of 4 so I have to cut one frame off if I want to scan them.
There are other features with the 850 but I haven't noticed any real differences in the end results. I use (used) SilverFast 8 Ai Studio software with both.

http://www.jeffreyglasser.com/

http://www.sculptureandphotography.com/

I actually just picked up an Epson 4870 a few days ago. I only paid $20, so I think I got a decent deal. Only thing is it didn't come with the film holders.

I was wondering if perhaps you could give me a couple pointers on using it properly? It scans normal items fine, but with films in transparency mode, it's given me quite poor results. I got mostly poor colors both from Epson Scan and from Vuescan in trial mode. And on top of that, it's not sharp at all. I made a (terrible) film holder from some cardboard, and I doubt it was the right thickness. I also tried scanning the negs laid flat on the glass bed, but both times the scans were much less sharp than the ones from the lab. (I was scanning negs that I'd already sent to a lab for developing and scanning.)

Would I need to get a better film holder to fix the sharpness issues? Is there something I'm doing wrong that's leading to very dull washed out colors? If you have any pointers, I'd appreciate it.

I should mention this is for 35mm, though.

 

[jeffreyg]

You might try resetting your scanning software back to the original default settings. Having the right film holders will help. Mine had worked very well for many years. As I recall, I bought it shortly after they came out and used it until lightning fried it last year. I use SilverFast but that shouldn't make a difference.

 

[138S]

I have all I need to shoot 4x5 but a scanner. I know I don't need a scanner to shoot 4x5, but for all other formats I shoot I scan the negatives from 16mm to 120. I use a V500 and have a V600 available if the V500 dies. I might consider a Epson 4990 if I could find one in great condition with the trays. Right now I can't spend the money to buy a V700 or V800.

What are some of you 4x5 shooters using to scan your negative? I've seen one example where the negative is scanned twice and stitched together, and I might consider that.

The 4990 is a good scanner that will deliver you very good images from 4x5" negatives, you can obtain around 75 effective MPix image quality. The V800 is better for 4x5 becuase it uses a second lens (it has two lenses that are automaticly replaced depending on the situation), while the 4990 has a single lens covering all the bed width the V800 has an additional lens covering up to 5.9" yielding better result, reaching 130 MPix effective from a 4x5 negative. Still those 75MPix from the 4990 can allow to print really big, and of course a flawless image can be disoplayed in a 8k TV. Also many LF and 35mm shots are not optimally sharp because DOF, aperture/diffraction, etc, and those 75 MPix effective can be enough. In scanning (IMO) what counts the most is user's proficiency in the scanning and in the edition.

A cheap 4x5" choice you have is a HP G4050. You can get it for around $50. It looks it has drivers for Windows 10:


While not a top notch scanner the G4050 will deliver very decent images from 4x5" BW negatives, you would need something better for very, very dense velvia slides or if you want to print really big, I would start with it until I would be able to invest in a V800. If you get a G4050 check if it comes with the film holder, sometimes it is sold separatedly:



If you buy one with return allowed then you have little risk...

 

[Bronson Dugnutt]

I started with a V600 to scan 4x5 negatives. Due to the insufficient width of the transparency unit in the V600 I would initially perform 2 scans then stitch them together. I've since switched to a V800 which will handle negative sizes up to 8x10, but the film holders (all formats) are pretty terrible in terms of producing film flatness. Additionally, film height is critical. The V800's holders are variable height... but they suck and the alternatives from BetterScanning are seemingly no longer available. I would use coins as shims under the edges corners of the negative. Not ideal, but you can use that to get a sense of the shim distance required for a proper film holder.

A copy stand, light table, and digital camera is another option, but you're likely to sacrifice resolution unless you want to stich together more than 2 images. That said, the ability to focus on the negative with the camera produces better results than my V800, particularly 35mm, and a stich of 16 or so shots of a 4x5 negative might be workable.

I like the suggestion of scanning contact prints.

 

[grat]

My experience with the v800 is it does a pretty good job at 3mm (the default setting on the holders). I admit, they're a bit tight-- someone at Epson miscalculated when they added the ANR glass, but with a bit of work, you can trim the tabs holding the glass back a little bit to make it easier to put the negative in flat. Also make sure you're scanning with the emulsion side closest to the glass when it's in the holder.

The 4x5 holder works better for me than the MF holder-- probably because the negative tends to be flatter.

 

[Minolta93]

You might try resetting your scanning software back to the original default settings. Having the right film holders will help. Mine had worked very well for many years. As I recall, I bought it shortly after they came out and used it until lightning fried it last year. I use SilverFast but that shouldn't make a difference.

Thanks, I'll try that.

As for the film holders, I'm considering 3d printing a set. You wouldn't happen to know the distance from the glass the film holders place the film, would you? If I could find that measurement I could whip up some holders pretty quick, I think.

 

[jeffreyg]

You might want to have someone backup these figures...overall: 22.3Cm W x 30.2Cm L, plus left side and bottom two 2mm projections plus a "handle" that you may not need. The opening at the top is 4Cm from the left and 3.4Cm on the right with the actual opening 1.2Cm W and 14.8Cm L and it appears to hold 4x5 film 3mm off the glass. The opening for the 4x5 film is 1.2Cm from the bottom of the top cut out and 5.5Cm from the left and 5.0Cm from the right. The bottom film opening is 2.8Cm from the bottom of the top film opening. The overall LxW and top cutout is the same for the other size film holders and they also appear to hold film 3mm off the glass. Mounted slides would be different off the glass. I no longer have the 4870 so these measurements were taken from the holders. If you find focus is off you can probably make some kind of a shim. Don't want to part with these holders -- you never know when an extra old scanner may come my way.
Good luck, I hope this helps.

http://www.jeffreyglasser.com/
http://www.sculptureandphotography.com/

 

[Minolta93]

You might want to have someone backup these figures...overall: 22.3Cm W x 30.2Cm L, plus left side and bottom two 2mm projections plus a "handle" that you may not need. The opening at the top is 4Cm from the left and 3.4Cm on the right with the actual opening 1.2Cm W and 14.8Cm L and it appears to hold 4x5 film 3mm off the glass. The opening for the 4x5 film is 1.2Cm from the bottom of the top cut out and 5.5Cm from the left and 5.0Cm from the right. The bottom film opening is 2.8Cm from the bottom of the top film opening. The overall LxW and top cutout is the same for the other size film holders and they also appear to hold film 3mm off the glass. Mounted slides would be different off the glass. I no longer have the 4870 so these measurements were taken from the holders. If you find focus is off you can probably make some kind of a shim. Don't want to part with these holders -- you never know when an extra old scanner may come my way.
Good luck, I hope this helps.

http://www.jeffreyglasser.com/
http://www.sculptureandphotography.com/

Hey, thanks a million for those measurements! I totally understand not wanting to part with the holders--better have them when you might need them. I think based on what you've said here plus images I can find on eBay I may be able to design a part on the computer and make it from plastic. I hear many people need shims anyway, so perhaps designing it a bit small to start with and then adding shims as needed is the way to go. Thanks again & have a good night.

 

[hsandler]

I tape the negative to the underside of a sheet of ANR glass and then suspend that over the scanner platen on felt standoffs at optimal height. I think it will work with ordinary glass if the negative is emulsion side to the glass. With an Epson V500 or V600 you will have to scan twice and stitch. I have done this and the stitching in Photoshop works seamlessly.

 

[Minolta93]

I tape the negative to the underside of a sheet of ANR glass and then suspend that over the scanner platen on felt standoffs at optimal height. I think it will work with ordinary glass if the negative is emulsion side to the glass. With an Epson V500 or V600 you will have to scan twice and stitch. I have done this and the stitching in Photoshop works seamlessly.

That sounds like an interesting idea as well. I don't have ANR glass but I do have a piece of picture frame glass I could try & suspent it using some pieces of thin, dense foam.