film scanning and gettings details from bad or badly developed film

algusev · Nov 18, 2020

Dear Sirs, I scan my old films with family photos. Scanning of some from them are of ugly quality. The sample is on the photo attached. I heard it can be because of wrong exposition or underdeveloping. I use Vuescan for this job. I want to get as many details on resulting image as possible. Please write me, which scanners do you recommend or point criterias for scanner choice. The list of preferrable scanners is below. I do not want to use chemicals for films, because of no knowledge and equipment.

Nikon ls 4000 ed
Coolscan IV ED
Coolscan IV ED
PrimeFilm 3650u
PIE PrimeFilm 3600PRO
PIE PrimeFilm 3600U
PIE PrimeFilm 3610AFL
PrimeFilm 3650LAB
PrimeFilm 7250U Pro 3
PrimeFilm 7250 Pro3
PrimeFilm XA
PrimeFilm Xas
CrystalScan 7200
Reflecta ProScan 3600
Reflecta ProScan 4000
Reflecta RPS 10M
Reflecta RPS 3600
Reflecta RPS 7200
Reflecta Silverscan 3600
Kodak RFS 3600
FilmScan 2700
Microtek filmscan 3600
PrimeFilm 2700
PrimeFilm 3650 Pro3
iScan 3600
Reflecta ProScan 4000
SmartDisk SmartScan 2700
SmartDisk SmartScan 3600
MediaX SilverScan 2700 Pro

shutterfinger · Nov 18, 2020

Choose the scanner with the highest Dmax if listed in the specks and the highest optical resolution. I have used Polaroid 35mm scanner before and with only 4000 dpi optical resolution it produced very sharp scans due to the quality lens. The Nikon scanners will be a very good choice. In Vuescan save the scan in RAW then edit in post processing software.

Les Sarile · Nov 18, 2020

What did you use to scan with for those two pics you attached?
Are these from b&w film? If so, when you hold it up to the light, do the shadow areas you show here have no detail?
Do you have a local access to a mini lab where they run a Noritsu, Agfa or Fuji scanner? If so you should try them to see what you can get from those scanners and maybe we'll have more info we can provide to you.

alanrockwood · Nov 19, 2020

Are they 35mm films? Are they regular silver negatives?

One scanner you might consider is Canon FS4000us. It's a 4000dpi scanner with scan quality very close to a Nikon 4000 dpi Scanner, and they are not expensive, but the disadvantage is that it scans slowly. The FE4000us can often be picked up on ebay for about $200, sometimes more and sometimes closer to $100. If you decide to get one be sure it comes with film holders because they are almost impossible to find otherwise.

Note that for color slide and color negative films the FS4000us does have IR dust and scratch removal capability. That won't work for regular black and white negatives, and it can be a bit iffy for Kodachrome slides, but it can be a great thing for E6 and C41 film.

One thing you can do is to scan with two different exposure levels and then combine them for a high dynamic range result. Some scanner/software systems make this fairly easy to do. If you do that you may be able to then go into photoshop or some similar software and fiddle with the image adjustments to bring out some of the shadow detail. Of course, you can't work true miracles that way, but often you can get surprisingly useful results.

Another option is to scan with a digital camera. There are several approaches to that method, with varying quality levels, and it is very fiddly to get started with, but some people are having good success with that approach.

etn · Nov 19, 2020

alanrockwood said:
Another option is to scan with a digital camera. There are several approaches to that method, with varying quality levels, and it is very fiddly to get started with, but some people are having good success with that approach.

This definitely has a learning curve but I am told getting the best results out of scanners also requires quite of a knowledge.

Coming back to OP's question, I have had good results with HDR process with DSLR-scan. Bracket over several pictures (I usually take them 2/3 of a stop apart, but you can experiment with different values).
Use base ISO of your camera, and ~2 stops closed from the max aperture of your lens.
Try several exposures, also overexpose by quite a bit. In my experience, exposures can take several seconds (nothing wrong with that).
You might be able to recover details that way.
Then combine the pictures in an HDR program (I use Photoshop but there might be others). You might not need to combine all pictures, maybe only 2 to 4 will be sufficient to cover all range.

Hope this helps

algusev · Nov 19, 2020

Yes, it is black and white film. I used Scanjet 4600 or HP g3010. There were no other accesible scanners to scan the films without cutting. No access to minіlab.If I shall have, I shall write. Nothing can be seen when putting the film to light. When scanning I turned off Restore Fading in Vuescan and got better but not sufficient result. The new result is below.

Les Sarile · Nov 19, 2020

algusev said:
Yes, it is black and white film. I used Scanjet 4600 or HP g3010. There were no other accesible scanners to scan the films without cutting. No access to minіlab.If I shall have, I shall write. Nothing can be seen when putting the film to light. When scanning I turned off Restore Fading in Vuescan and got better but not sufficient result. The new result is below.

I am not too familiar with either scanners but looking online it appears there transparency adapters available to all you to more properly scan film. Are you using a transparency adapter in either Scanjet 4600 or HP g3010? Having a transparency adapter can provide significantly better results although I don't hold out much promise given that you don't see much detail when holding it up to the light.

In anycase, since you listed older Nikon Coolscan scanners on your list, I would recommend the Nikon Coolscan V or 5000 over the Coolscans on your list. Much cheaper and should provide better results then your Scanjet 4600 or HP g3010 would be the Epson V500 or 550. These are on the lower end of Epsons and there are more capable models at higher cost such as the older 4990, V700/750 or newest 800/850.

algusev · Nov 19, 2020

Of course, I use transparency modules for my scanners.

Les Sarile · Nov 19, 2020

algusev said:
Of course, I use transparency modules for my scanners.

I am not too familiar wit Vuescan but if there is a way to increase exposure time when scanning - as opposed to brightness adjustment, then you may be able to get a little more info in the dark area. Using Nikonscan on my Coolscan there is such an adjustment and you can tell as the scan times get longer. Also, if you scan in file format with no compression - like TIF, then there is a little more room to get details in the dark areas using shadows tool in post.

Minilab scanners - like the Noritsu, generally scans more towards brighter results and usually blows out highlights. This may provide a little more detail.

I understand that real drum scanners may be able to squeeze more detail out of the shadows. If available they are generally much more expensive then minilabs.

But as you said, if holding up to light shows not much more then it maybe as good as it gets.

algusev · Nov 19, 2020

I have one question about scanning in lab witrh Noritsu or Fuji. Should I simply order scanning in the lab and they do with their standard options? There are some labs near me.

Les Sarile · Nov 19, 2020

Normally, minilabs are all automated and not many options as they try to keep the prices low. If you have options then ask for uncompressed 16bit files as this will offer the most adjustments in post work.
If they can brighten to get more detail that would be beneficial.

Alan Edward Klein · Nov 19, 2020

Epson flatbed scanners that scan photos and film can scan photos with ICE that will remove dust, wrinkles, and other imperfections. They can do the same with Ektachrome type slides but not Kodachrome. ICE also won't work scanning BW negatives.

Les Sarile · Nov 21, 2020

algusev said:
There are some labs near me.

I would be curious to see the results from the minilab when you get them.

grat · Nov 21, 2020

Did you try multi-exposure under Vuescan?

algusev · Nov 22, 2020

I shall go to a minilab next week,

algusev · Nov 22, 2020

There is no option called multiexposure in Vuescan options. May be because the scanner does not support it and because it is negative I tried 10 pass scanning (pointed 10 as a number of passes) It is written on Hamricks software website on the exposure::
"This option provides a way to get additional detail from the darker parts of the scanned image. It is available on scanners that are able to increase the CCD exposure time.

A first pass is performed as usual with the normal RGB exposure. This will be an appropriate exposure for the image as a whole. Then a second pass is performed with a longer exposure, which can reveal additional detail in dark areas not captured in the first pass. VueScan then merges the results of the two by choosing from either the first or second exposure pass.

Professional Option: This option is displayed when the scanner can control the CCD exposure time and when scanning slide film (not Color negative, B/W negative or Microfilm)."

Deleted member 88956 · Nov 22, 2020

Given scanners you used, don't be discouraged by shown results, neither is made to deliver quality film scans. Think of them as document scanners with crude film scanning capability, an add on feature to help sell the product.

Wallendo · Nov 22, 2020

Although not on your list, I am satisfied with met Plustek 8100i. It works for 35mm, and there are third party holders that allow scanning of 126 and 110 negatives.
Looking at the scans, and especially the large amount of noise and dirt, I suspect that there is probably not much salvageable information in those two negatives. It just looks like a badly exposed negative. A better scanner likely would pick up a little more detail

Deleted member 88956 · Nov 22, 2020

As for actual quality of information on the negatives, they can be examined with good certainty on a light table with good quality loupe. I agree that shown scans appear to reveal they were not exposed/processed optimally, but scanners used were no champs either.

algusev · Nov 22, 2020

Witold said:
As for actual quality of information on the negatives, they can be examined with good certainty on a light table with good quality loupe. I agree that shown scans appear to reveal they were not exposed/processed optimally, but scanners used were no champs either.

This is second reason, why I posted here. If Noritsu with some resolution make essential success, I shall have important parameter to chose other scanner for buying or getting in other ways.

runswithsizzers · Nov 22, 2020

algusev said:
There is no option called multiexposure in Vuescan options. May be because the scanner does not support it and because it is negative I tried 10 pass scanning (pointed 10 as a number of passes) It is written on Hamricks software website on the exposure::
"This option provides a way to get additional detail from the darker parts of the scanned image. It is available on scanners that are able to increase the CCD exposure time.

A first pass is performed as usual with the normal RGB exposure. This will be an appropriate exposure for the image as a whole. Then a second pass is performed with a longer exposure, which can reveal additional detail in dark areas not captured in the first pass. VueScan then merges the results of the two by choosing from either the first or second exposure pass.

Professional Option: This option is displayed when the scanner can control the CCD exposure time and when scanning slide film (not Color negative, B/W negative or Microfilm)."

I think you may be confusing two different features of the VueScan software.

The Multi Sample setting has a box labeled "Number of Scans" where you can enter a number, and the software will scan the image that many times and then average the results. But there is no increase in exposure. The purpose of multi sampling is to reduce noise and not to give more exposure. On this <VueScan help page> The multi sample feature is described under "Input | Number of passes". That feature does not require hardware support, so it should always appear in VueScan.

The text you quoted from the VueScan website describes Input | Multi Exposure. With Multi Exposure selected, the software scans only twice, with the second scan getting more exposure. This option will not appear in the Input menu unless you have VueScan's Professional Options enabled AND you have selected Slide film as the source AND your scanner supports Multi Exposure.

I'm not sure because I haven't tried it, but it *might* be possible to scan your negative as a slide with Multi Exposure enabled (producing a negative image) - then change the film type from Slide to Negative to convert it to a Positive image, and Save the change? If that is not possible, I'm sure it is possible to scan your negative as a slide, and then invert the image to a positive in some other software, so if your scanner supports Multi Exposure you can probably use it with negatives.

However, after having said all that, I've never seen a negative that really needed Multi Exposure, at least not with my old Minolta film scanner. That is, the densest area of negative film is much less dense than the densest areas of slides, and I believe most scanners should not have any trouble reading negatives without needing any special scanning technique.

Deleted member 88956 · Nov 22, 2020

@algusev It is a good idea to have same negs scanned by a good lab, so results will show you what can be expected. I would ask for best scans possible, so you can see the ceiling for expectations.

Alan Edward Klein · Nov 22, 2020

If the film is not exposed right, you can't expect much from any scanner. You can't get blood from a turnip.

Adrian Bacon · Nov 22, 2020

algusev said:
Yes, it is black and white film. I used Scanjet 4600 or HP g3010. There were no other accesible scanners to scan the films without cutting. No access to minіlab.If I shall have, I shall write. Nothing can be seen when putting the film to light. When scanning I turned off Restore Fading in Vuescan and got better but not sufficient result. The new result is below. View attachment 259781 View attachment 259781 View attachment 259781

if you do not see the detail in the film when you hold it up to light, you won’t get it in a scan.

algusev · Nov 22, 2020

Witold, please write me, how to define good lab. There are 5-7 minilanbs in my city with Noritsu or Nikon equipment. Peoples opinions on them are positive or they are unpopular.

film scanning and gettings details from bad or badly developed film

Deleted member 88956

Deleted member 88956

Deleted member 88956

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency