Scanning Sojourn: 35mm Plustek -> DSLR (35 and 120) -> ?

[JWMster]

Having read around, I guess I'm a hybrid who prefers shooting film for capture and printing digitally.

I've used a Plustek 8200 for 35mm and it was "okay". DSLR scans were every bit as good and much faster. Not really tempted to go back to the creep along process there. BUT with MF 120 film, I'm finding either my DSLR technique needs upping a bit in a number of areas, or I need to look at a 120 film scanner.

To debug my process, I've just sent out a few negs for Imacon scans to see whether the issue is my 120 film DSLR scanning technique or something wrong in the negative itself. Should pick those up later this week.

Meantime, I look at used equipment for Nikon, Epson and Imacon and there's stuff available in teh $2,000 price range. In that range, you also see the underpublicized Braun FS-120 and Plustek Opticfilm 120. A hardware return to scans in my view becomes more realistic if I can't debug the DSLR process, OR in the event that an occasional Imacon scan ($15 each) begins to look like a more common thing. Fact is, a DSLR scan - even a bad one, isn't a bad way to produce the equivalent of a proof sheet to make a decision in terms of what I want to print and therefore push out for a high res scan.

Thoughts? Suggestions? Experience? Insights definitely appreciated. Thanks!

 

[ced]

Well how many mpx on your dslr?

 

[JWMster]

My DSLR is a Sony A7RII which is 42mpx

 

[ced]

That should be sufficient for 120 film you need a good macro/bellows arrangement to fill the frame edge to edge on the short side.

 

[Billy Axeman]

With a 43 MP sensor you get a resolution of about 3000 dpi for the smallest 120 format 60x40, scanned horizontal. That's not enough in my opinion.
A solution could be to scan in two rows and two columns and to stitch the frames. The bigger the format the worse it gets.

As for the Plustek Opticfilm 120, RattyMouse was contemplating buying one (I saw a question about Silverfast Software from him recently). Perhaps he could chime in.

A German web-shop specialized in scanners (ScanDig) is saying that they don't sell the Plustek 120 anymore because there were too many customers with problems.

 

[JWMster]

Billy:

Interesting. Thanks! I find the DSLR scans okay. Problem is that shooting 6X6, the Sony doesn't actually shoot this format, so a lot of the image space is lost, and the cropping involved results in an enlargement before you even get started. Fixing of these issues is on my horizon... and I'm hoping this discussion will lead to developing a solution. The 6X6 format is really my favorite as it obviates turning the camera and I really like the composition it presents ...for the differences it makes manifest from 35mm. So getting ideas on how to proceed is helpful.

Have looked at the ScanDig site from time-to-time, and noted their favoring the Braun FS-120, but clearly I missed their dissing the Plustek. Can't disagree based on my experience with the Plustek 8200... which is fine for what it is, but not good enough to make you want to spend another $1,500 on their hardware. Their review notes the higher res of the Nikon 9000 MF 120 scans, but I don't know whether all the parts for 9000 can be found (film holders in particular) and whether the firmware and PC connectors are compatible with current WIndows 10 hardware. Ebay gives about the same price for a refurbished Nikon Coolscan 9000 as for the Braun FS-120.

Anyway, much to ponder. Thanks!

 

[Les Sarile]

If you are able to DSLR copy 35mm film then you already have the means to do the same for 120 film. What is it that you are having problems with - not enough resolution or you suspect the film doesn't contain the detail?

BTW, what kinds of films are you using - b&w, slides, color negatives?

 

[JWMster]

I'm mainly a B&W shooter, but have recently done some color slides in both formats. At the moment my scan issues lie in determining whether I have a scanning issue or development issue, but even AFTER that's resolved, I know that the enlargement of 6X6 images from capture in a 35mm Sony A7RII will result an initial enlargement on the crop. Not fatal by any means, but I'm just keeping an open mind as to what is the best, most reasonable cost option for getting this done. The negatives I'm having done on an Imacon scanner were run me close to $100 for five or six. That's enough dough to ask the question in terms of longer-term options. As a guy who enjoys printing and printing big from my digital scans of these negatives, it'd be great to get these steps figured out.

And I guess I can try the stitch-together approach laid out in Luminous Landscape... but I'm resisting that for the moment.

 

[Les Sarile]

Maybe an example to show this developing or DSLR scanning issue would be helpful?

 

[JWMster]

Yes, yes indeed. But to understand the problem of my DSLR scan technique, I think I have to get the high end commercial scans back to compare with my own. Then I'll know whether I have a scanning issue or an issue with my negatives. Won't have the commercial scans back for comparison until later in the week, but my gut is that I'm not metering the negatives right. I've been using an averaging process rather than "spot".... so think that might be the fix. We'll have to look first and then see.

Meantime, I've corresponded with a local guy who advertises on ebay that he does Nikon Coolscan repairs for 8000's and 9000's and he's suggesting that either will do the job, but the 8000 is 12-bit while the 9000 is 16-bit. I'm curious whether this old technology is worth the trouble in operations or not. I've never used one. Any thoughts?

 

[Cholentpot]

Stitching works great with 6x6. I do it all the time with my DSLR.

 

[JWMster]

Never done it... so I don't know how. Have to look into it, though.
Interestingly, Capture One now has a CH version (Cultural Heritage) that is oriented towards film scanners. Something worth looking into.

 

[ced]

Cholentpot, that is a fine result via dslr stitching looks like all the range of the neg was captured!
This could aid many considering the interest so I pose the questions below (thanks).
Which dslr & how many stitches, also how did you move the neg or camera & still keep the alignment/focus?

 

[JWMster]

Cholenpot: I want to compliment you on the stitched shot as well. Great effort at capturing the dynamic range - especially the detail in the shadows which I'm sure is better NOT on the net! But I also would 2nd ced's question. I think if it's a small number of recognizable portions of the image - say 1/3's, 1/4's or something it wouldn't be impossible and readily done. But if it gets into 1/20ths and on up beyond, it could be like trying to assemble a jigsaw puzzle where neither shape nor color helps the process. All of which merely attests that I haven't tried or done this... but I do recognize it's virtues. Again, Luminous Landscape had a couple of good articles on this not far back.

 

[Les Sarile]

Meantime, I've corresponded with a local guy who advertises on ebay that he does Nikon Coolscan repairs for 8000's and 9000's and he's suggesting that either will do the job, but the 8000 is 12-bit while the 9000 is 16-bit. I'm curious whether this old technology is worth the trouble in operations or not. I've never used one. Any thoughts?

Over 40K frames of all the films I've ever used and I can comfortably say the Nikon Coolscan 5000 & 9000 makes scanning uneventful and fast. These scanners still work as if brand new. I've also scanned many thousands more using various other desktops, minilabs, imacons and DSLR to compare to.

Full res version -> http://www.fototime.com/42FA75AE4A44BD3/orig.jpg


Stitching is also very useful tool when combining multiple frames of film such as the example below using 4 frames of Kodak Ektar 100.

Larger version -> http://www.fototime.com/AF9F7B335AA39A5/orig.jpg

Also waiting to review the Nikon D850 to use for DSLR scanning as it has a built-in color negative conversion. Hopefully it will be as competent as using the Coolscan+Nikonscan combination albeit without ICE.

 

[JWMster]

Les: Thanks for posting. Have you ever used the Nikon with Vuescan... so that it works with Windows 10? I have neither a Mac nor a pre-Win10 machine on hand. And my interest is 120 6x6. Nice shots well scanned by the way. Thanks!

 

[Billy Axeman]

For those who want to do some experiments with stitching I can recommend Microsoft's ICE (Image Composite Editor).
It's free, more info and download:
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/project/image-composite-editor/

It is already a quite old program but it still gets updates. The program interface is straightforward and simple to use, without loads of distracting settings.

Scanning a 120 negative with an APS-C camera doesn't show any artifacts, not even on pixel level. You can help the program though by moving the camera nicely parallel to the film plane in a regular fashion and applying sufficient overlap.

 

[Les Sarile]

Have you ever used the Nikon with Vuescan... so that it works with Windows 10? I have neither a Mac nor a pre-Win10 machine on hand. And my interest is 120 6x6.

I tried Vuescan briefly a long time ago now and much prefer Nikonscan's automation, adjustments, controls and ICE. I just bought another Windows Vista equipped PC just to ensure I continue using Nikonscan.

 

[Cholentpot]

Cholentpot, that is a fine result via dslr stitching looks like all the range of the neg was captured!
This could aid many considering the interest so I pose the questions below (thanks).
Which dslr & how many stitches, also how did you move the neg or camera & still keep the alignment/focus?

Cholenpot: I want to compliment you on the stitched shot as well. Great effort at capturing the dynamic range - especially the detail in the shadows which I'm sure is better NOT on the net! But I also would 2nd ced's question. I think if it's a small number of recognizable portions of the image - say 1/3's, 1/4's or something it wouldn't be impossible and readily done. But if it gets into 1/20ths and on up beyond, it could be like trying to assemble a jigsaw puzzle where neither shape nor color helps the process. All of which merely attests that I haven't tried or done this... but I do recognize it's virtues. Again, Luminous Landscape had a couple of good articles on this not far back.

Thanks!

The camera and film was a Bronica S2, 80 2.8, Shanghai GP3, Rodinal 1:25.

Now for scanning.

I use a Canon T2i (550D) with cheap macro-tubes and and excellent copy of a Pentax 50 1.8 set between f/8 and f/11.The DSLR sits on a copy stand from an old enlarger and is pointed at a cheap tracing light-pad I got off Amazon. Negative sits in a 6x6 carrier. Exposure is between 1/4 and 1"6 seconds depending on film and thickness. I shoot half the negative and then move the carrier to frame the other half. I do have a bit of overlap but Photoshop takes care of it.

I shoot in RAW tethered to Lightroom. I export to a panorama in Photoshop and let photoshop take care of the rest. Crop in PS, I use some amazing actions I found online to invert and get the levels more or less on. Export back to LR for levels and JPEG out from there.

Lubitel 2, Shanghai GP3

Bownie No.2, Shanghai GP3

Richoflex VII, Ektar 100

 

[ced]

Cholentpot, thanks for enlightening us on the method much appreciated!
Thanks for posting the other fine examples.

 

[JWMster]

Ditto. I don't have Photoshop but I do use Capture One, and I'm not sure whether the stitching function exists there. But I am glad to hear you're only doing 2 shots. Sounds very reasonable. Thanks!

 

[MattKing]

+1 for Microsoft ICE for stitching.
I use it to allow me to scan and assemble my 11"x14" prints!

 

[JWMster]

Well... I've now looked at some commercially "done" Imacon scans and I have to say, my own aren't as bad as I thought. Some of the "problem" is in my negatives, but I think I've done a better scanning job my own self. Yes, there are some things I need to clean up to get it right... namely get another sheet of anti-Newton glass, but for a 1st blush approach, my scans were pretty good. If I can figure out how to do the stitching with ICE, get the AN-glass, smooth the negative chem flow (separate project... well underway), I think we're beginning to get somewhere. This has been helpful. Thanks a lot.

 

[Les Sarile]

The negatives I'm having done on an Imacon scanner were run me close to $100 for five or six.

Curious as to what film did you have scanned and what camera did you use to shoot it?

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

The negatives I'm having done on an Imacon scanner were run me close to $100 for five or six.

That is good value for lab Imacons. Where it becomes tight is if/when you are charged $100 for each scan!