Issues Agfa Billy I - about 1st film test

[LuckyMe]

Hello everyone,
I`ve bought this summer a Agfa Billy I. I was very excited to tested out because I like the 6x9 format. After taking my first roll of 120 film (Fomapan 200), developed in a shop in Vienna and scanned myself at home with an Epson V550, the result were promising at first sight as exposure (most of them OOF). The OOF isn`t a problem now, I`ll get it better next time. The problem is, after zooming in, there`s some thing happening (I don`t know how is called). I`ll attached some examples (screenshots) which are zoomed in. Thank you and have a nice weekend!.

 

[bernard_L]

Please make sure the infrared dust filter is OFF.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

Insert tongue into cheek. "Ah, those are the vaunted adjacency effects." Bite tongue. Remove tongue. Sooth tongue with ice cream.

See post above for solution.

 

[beemermark]

What do you expect from a 3 element lens and a relatively low resolution scanner?

 

[LuckyMe]

What do you expect from a 3 element lens and a relatively low resolution scanner?

Good point!

 

[bernard_L]

What do you expect from a 3 element lens and a relatively low resolution scanner?

Have you just looked at the two images submitted by the OP before issuing that comment?

The OP is most probably referring to the artefacts that appear at the contours between dark and light regions. No optical lens, whether a triplet or a planar, or the lens of the scanner itself, could cause these artefacts. They are a numerical artefact, and it is very likely caused by the OP leaving the ICE dust suppression "ON" when scanning this B/W film.

@ LuckyMe : once again, can you confirm whether you left ICE on when producing these scans; and if unsure, can you please repeat the scan making sure ICE is off?

@ LuckyMe : a triplet lens, at f/8, f/11, f/16 produces images as good as a 4-element lens (Tessar, Skopar, Solinar, etc). I say this not because I repeat what others wrote on the internet (repeating, etc...), but from comparing images from my Nettar (Novar-anastigmat, 3-element) and my Perkeo (Color-Skopar, 4-element). Both scanned properly on a V700.

 

[bernard_L]

What do you expect from a 3 element lens... ?

This.
Zeiss Nettar, Novar anastigmat. 400TX, D-76 1+1. Scanned V700 @ "only" 1600dpi.

Full frame (56x56mm) resampled to fit on screen

100% crop of 1600dpi scan.
This image printed at 300dpi would be 12 inches (300mm) on a side. The image on-screen would be larger (most screens are less than 300dpi).

 

[LuckyMe]

Have you just looked at the two images submitted by the OP before issuing that comment?

The OP is most probably referring to the artefacts that appear at the contours between dark and light regions. No optical lens, whether a triplet or a planar, or the lens of the scanner itself, could cause these artefacts. They are a numerical artefact, and it is very likely caused by the OP leaving the ICE dust suppression "ON" when scanning this B/W film.

@ LuckyMe : once again, can you confirm whether you left ICE on when producing these scans; and if unsure, can you please repeat the scan making sure ICE is off?

@ LuckyMe : a triplet lens, at f/8, f/11, f/16 produces images as good as a 4-element lens (Tessar, Skopar, Solinar, etc). I say this not because I repeat what others wrote on the internet (repeating, etc...), but from comparing images from my Nettar (Novar-anastigmat, 3-element) and my Perkeo (Color-Skopar, 4-element). Both scanned properly on a V700.

Yes, I was referring about those artefacts.
And yes, the ICE was ON. With 35mm film was and is always ON and never happened those artefacts.
I scanned the film without ICE and artefacts disappeared.
From now on...always with ICE OFF.

Thank you very much @bernard_L

 

[LuckyMe]

This.
Zeiss Nettar, Novar anastigmat. 400TX, D-76 1+1. Scanned V700 @ "only" 1600dpi.

Full frame (56x56mm) resampled to fit on screen
View attachment 317204

100% crop of 1600dpi scan.
This image printed at 300dpi would be 12 inches (300mm) on a side. The image on-screen would be larger (most screens are less than 300dpi).

View attachment 317218

Thank you!. Very much appreciated!.

 

[bernard_L]

Yes, I was referring about those artefacts.
And yes, the ICE was ON. With 35mm film was and is always ON and never happened those artefacts.
I scanned the film without ICE and artefacts disappeared.
From now on...always with ICE OFF.

Thank you very much @bernard_L

You may/should keep ICE on when scanning:

• color negative film
• slide film (other than Kodachrome)

This said, with a little care and a Giotto rocket blower, I have no problem scanning b/w without ICE.

 

[LuckyMe]

You may/should keep ICE on when scanning:

• color negative film
• slide film (other than Kodachrome)

This said, with a little care and a Giotto rocket blower, I have no problem scanning b/w without ICE.

Thank you very much for the tipps!.