Scanning 4x5 with an epson v600

[Ces1um]

I recently saw on youtube that when you're scanning your negatives with a flatbed scanner that you should always use a scanning mask as the scanner actually focuses slightly above the glass and the masks are designed to hold the negative above the glass. Is this true? I've been scanning my pinhole 4x5 negatives directly on the glass but if this is true I probably should make a mask to raise the negative off of the glass. Can anybody confirm this for me?

 

[shutterfinger]

Scanners are designed to give the sharpest scans with their film holders which hold the negative slightly above the bed glass.
This is the generic optimal position but the actual height will vary due to production tolerances in the mirrors and lens used in the scanner.
Make a film mask and do some test scans at 2400 to 3600 dpi shimming the mask with paper or card stock to find the optimal height for your scanner.

 

[Jim Jones]

It might not make any difference in the somewhat unsharp pinhole negatives.

 

[MattKing]

It might not make any difference in the somewhat unsharp pinhole negatives.

One of the consequences of using a pinhole rather than a lens is that you don't normally achieve very high levels of acutance (edge contrast). And acutance is probably the most important component of the very subjective phenomenon that we refer to as "sharpness".
This low level of acutance is simply a natural consequence of how pinholes work. Even if the pinhole image is full of detail and tonality, it won't normally appear "sharp"
Whether you print optically or scan, if you want the image to appear "sharp", you need to add that sharpness artificially. Unsharp masking techniques and control of contrast are the most common techniques - both when working optically and when working with a scanned image.
Ironically, if you want a scanned pinhole image to look sharp, it works best if you first throw away a lot of the detail by resizing it down, and then add the sharpness artificially.
It is probably easier to work with a scanned image where the film is at the right height, but it is difficult to predict what that height will be on your scanner,

 

[Ces1um]

This is all good to know. I wasn't sure how much detail I might be losing scanning directly on the scanner glass but I was never expecting a sharp photo from my pinhole camera. I just thought, if there was a sizeable difference between scanner glass and scanning mask focus that it might be worthwhile exploring. If the difference is negligible then I won't bother going through the exercise.

 

[Jim Jones]

Some scanners, like the Epson V700, are designed to scan large negatives in contact with the glass and smaller negatives in the negative holder. The focus of the scanner changes between these two modes. With such scanners, just lay the negative on the glass. The Epson comes with a thin plastic guide that defines the area for 8x10 negatives and insures that the calibration area at the top of the scan is unobstructed.

 

[jim10219]

Before you go spending money on a negative holder, measure the optimum focal distance for your scanner. Not all scanners work best with a negative holder. I found this out on my Epson 4990 when I bought a negative holder and noticed my scans weren't as sharp as before. For me, a negative holder was a waste of time and money.

Take a stack of dimes and lay them on the glass of your scanner. Stack them so when you scan them, the scanner can pick up parts of each dime. That will give you several different heights to experiment with at once. Zoom in on the scan, and determine which dime is sharpest. Whichever dime is sharpest will determine the height at which you should be scanning. If the dime laying flat on the glass is sharpest, then don't waste money on a negative holder. That will also help determine the height of the negative holder you need. You may need to buy an adjustable height negative holder if the optimum height isn't where the standard negative holder rests. But then again, if the optimum height is where the standard negative holder lies, then why waste money on an expensive, adjustable negative holder?

 

[Doug Fisher]

Another issue besides focus is the increased possibility of Newton Rings when scanning directly on the glass bed of the scanner. If you have to scan on the glass bed, place your film with the dull/matte/emulsion side down. That can help minimize Newton Rings.

Doug

 

[Wallendo]

My personal experience with the V600 is that it really doesn't make a difference. I use an aftermarket holder for 120, but on occasion have had to scan some old family negatives in unusual formats and have found that placing the negative on the glass. If the OP is happy with the results he is getting, there is no reason to change.

 

[jim10219]

Another issue besides focus is the increased possibility of Newton Rings when scanning directly on the glass bed of the scanner. If you have to scan on the glass bed, place your film with the dull/matte/emulsion side down. That can help minimize Newton Rings.

Doug

That's the truth! I eventually adopted a wet mount method. The whole reason I originally tried a negative holder was because of the Newton Rings. I figured if I could get them off the glass, that would solve that problem. But it introduced focus issues. Luckily, I discovered a way to wet mount photos using stuff I had lying around the house, so I didn't have to invest a bunch of time and money on yet another technique that might or might not work.

 

[Ces1um]

My personal experience with the V600 is that it really doesn't make a difference. I use an aftermarket holder for 120, but on occasion have had to scan some old family negatives in unusual formats and have found that placing the negative on the glass. If the OP is happy with the results he is getting, there is no reason to change.

I have holders for 120 and 135 but when it comes to 4x5 the v600 doesn't have a holder for that. I'm fairly new to pinhole photography so I am not expecting any photos to be sharp, but I'm just wondering if my negatives are actually sharper than what my scanner is producing because of the lack of a holder. I don't know if my results on film are actually better than what I'm getting with my scanner. I thought to have my local lab scan it, but they charge such a large amount for a scan that it seems unreasonable to me. I also have no way to print optically at the moment so I can't go that route. I've watched a few youtube videos on making a 4x5 holder but the material they suggest to use raises the negative off the glass much higher than the 135/120 holders do so I'm sure that won't work that well. I may just bite the bullet and get it scanned and compare the files. If there's a big improvement I'll go through the exercise of making a holder. If not, I won't bother. Thanks everyone for the help.

 

[jeffreyg]

I am sill using an old 4870 which has a holder for 4x5 and getting excellent results. I suspect Epson had some reason for not having a 4x5 holder for the 600. If you can devise a way to keep the film flat on the glass try scanning it as a transparency / positive at the highest resolution and then invert it in PhotoShop or the like. I can't say it will work but it is easy to try and won't cost anything.

http://www.jeffreyglasser.com/

 

[shutterfinger]

I've watched a few youtube videos on making a 4x5 holder but the material they suggest to use raises the negative off the glass much higher than the 135/120 holders do so I'm sure that won't work that well.

So go to your local office supply or verity store and get a sheet of black poster board or black construction paper. Cut your mask from that then add layer at a time until you reach the optimal height. Use a regular negative with sharp detail to find the optimal height of your scanner.