Looking for something to view my 35mm negatives with

[E. von Hoegh]

And can't you tell with a good loupe and a light box ?

Of course I can. But I have a good loupe and lightbox.

 

[Bill Burk]

The inexpensive Loupe that Benjiboy showed you earlier in this thread... Is well-suited to the job of checking negatives for sharpness... It's a good value until you decide if you need something better... It will have "fringing" and other minor aberrations that will not matter for the purpose of judging how good the negative is, even if you might one day appreciate a finer-quality optic. You will be fine with it.

 

[tkamiya]

I'd say start with a simple and less expensive method, which will be a loupe and a light box. It may be sufficient for OP or may not be. It all depends on one's needs, expectations, and also vision.

It will NOT be a waste of money to have a good loupe and a light box anyway, as long as one is involved in analog photography.

What a microscope allows one to do is to have a better look at a negative. Something that look suspicious/doubtful with 8x or 10x loupe will be awfully obvious when one cranks the scope up to 40x. One time, I found a long thin scratch going across a negative. With my loupe, I could see this scratch suddenly ends. With a 40x scope, I found a little particle embedded at the end of this scratch. So, apparently, a little dust/stone got dragged across the film as it traveled through the camera.... Without a scope and finding of this particle, I'll be wondering what the heck caused it.

One caution with this is that at 40x looking at a 35mm negative, one is basically looking at the image as if it is blown up to almost 60 inches wide! Almost all images appear un-sharp and grainy! At 10x, it will be 15 inches wide equivalent.

Like anything else, it does require some understanding and skill to use it effectively.

 

[Patrick Robert James]

You guys sure know how to complicate the crap out of things!

I use a Fuji flat (1/2 inch thick) lightbox that I got from them for using so much film, and I have several different loupes. The one I use the most is the front lens group of a 80-200 f/4ish that was jammed. Killer loupe that cost next to nothing. It is large enough that I can keep both my eyes open looking at negs from a decent distance, about a foot.

In reality, anything can work. If your negs are sleeved, you can hold them against a window and use a magnifying glass. There is no need to get overly complicated.

 

[benjiboy]

You guys sure know how to complicate the crap out of things!

I use a Fuji flat (1/2 inch thick) lightbox that I got from them for using so much film, and I have several different loupes. The one I use the most is the front lens group of a 80-200 f/4ish that was jammed. Killer loupe that cost next to nothing. It is large enough that I can keep both my eyes open looking at negs from a decent distance, about a foot.

In reality, anything can work. If your negs are sleeved, you can hold them against a window and use a magnifying glass. There is no need to get overly complicated.

Exactly my point, suddenly for a member who is obviously new to film photography seeing if his negatives. are sharp enough to send to a lab to enlarge becomes a science project involving microscopes is I think a little excessive.

 

[Bill Burk]

Granted the best answer was post #4.

hyphmngo, you will be well-served by that specific 8x loupe. I don't think you "need" a light box. You can use a window, computer monitor or glass from a picture frame over a light bulb.

The original gadget you saw is too expensive for the job and not enough magnification to see if the negative is sharp.

Please accept that the excessive discussion may be helpful to give you ideas of things you might one day want - may find at a garage sale or maybe you have lying around the house already.

But none of it is necessary.

 

[fotch]

Or make a contact sheet on 8x10 and then examine with a magnifier or loop.

 

[benjiboy]

Or make a contact sheet on 8x10 and then examine with a magnifier or loop.

The O.P. has no darkroom, if he could make a contact sheet he could make his own enlargements.

 

[Chan Tran]

I use a film scanner! Not exactly great but it has its own advantages and disadvantages.

 

[fotch]

The O.P. has no darkroom, if he could make a contact sheet he could make his own enlargements.

You can make them in the sun, you don't need a darkroom.

 

[pentaxuser]

You can make them in the sun, you don't need a darkroom.

Are you referring to the usual RC paper such as Ilford MGIV. If not what system produces contact prints of say 135/120 negs in the sun

Thanks


pentaxuser

 

[Gerald C Koch]

You can also use a piece of white cardboard illuminated by a desk lamp and a magnifying glass. Hold the film far enough away from the cardboard so that it doesn't cast a shadow. Simple, cheap, and effective.

 

[John Koehrer]

Are you referring to the usual RC paper such as Ilford MGIV. If not what system produces contact prints of say 135/120 negs in the sun pentaxuser

NUTS, quoted the wrong post. I meant #35.

I hope that's meant to be tongue in cheek. You can hold the negs up against a window but it's not practical with a loose
strip of film.
Cyanotypes(sunshine prints) are simple but not convenient to examine negatives with. Kits are really inexpensive a lot of schools will use them to contact leaves and other misc. stuff.

 

[tkamiya]

You guys sure know how to complicate the crap out of things!

If we didn't over complicate things, it wouldn't be called a hobby!

 

[gone]

I recommend buying an old, cheap ($40) Epson 2450 scanner to proof your negs. 35mm negs are tiny, and I finally gave up trying to see what was going on w/ a loupe. Making a contact print is possible, but again, really, really small. I've missed a lot of stuff doing that. I've had more than a few instances where I've printed negs that I shouldn't have printed if I had been able to see what was really going on in there. Some people have trouble making the switch in their mind from neg to positive too. A scanned neg blown up on a monitor will show up all the glorious faults that otherwise wouldn't be seen until you make an enlarged print. With 6x6 or even 6x4.5 I have no problems. The Epson's scanning top is also removable. You can lay it down flat and have a great light table, so it's a twofer.

 

[rubyfalls]

When I first started, I used loupe and an iPad app designed for dentists to use to view their X-ray negs. At $.99, it was a bargain. Now I have a plate of opaque (white) glass that I had cut at the hardware store. Sealed the edges with electrician's tape so I wouldn't kill myself, and I swap out the safe light glass and use it as a light box. Again, at less than $6, a bargain.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[gone]

You can get by with zero money if you wish. Set your computer to google's home page, tape the edge of the negative strip to the top edge of your monitor, and use a 50mm lens for a loupe. Or use a window w/ mid afternoon sun and said camera lens. Some people, including me, have a bit of difficulty w/ these methods because, one, getting my mind to grasp the fact that white is black and black is white on a print (vs the neg) has resulted in some surprises, and two, those negs are awfully tiny. So w/ 35mm, but not w/ anything bigger, I like to s*an them and see what's up. I no longer shoot anything but 35mm now, so perhaps w/ time and practice I can get the hang of viewing the negs and making a print decision. Perhaps.