Tell Me What I'm Doing Wrong Focusing - Rate These Terrible Photos

[Jeremy Mudd]

Scandig also claims that they can only get 2300 DPI out of an Epson V800/850. My personal experience runs counter to that.

The Epsons do suffer from a lack of adjustable focus-- this means the target has to be scanned at the precise focus-height of the scanner, which on the 700/800 series, is either touching the glass of the bed, or approximately 3mm above the bed. As the 600 doesn't have dual-lens (to my knowledge), the focus height should be at the glass bed height.

There are also many options on the scanning software that can affect the resulting image. I turn most of them off when scanning, which leaves a slightly "flat", mildly unsharp image. But the image can easily be resharpened, and contrast is just a slider.

For the 600, its just above the glass bed height - somewhere between 2 and 3mm if I recall correctly. I use the Betterscanning.com adjustable film holders with the ANR insert on 120 and for me that combo works great. They raise the neg to the optimum height and keep it flat with the ANR insert.

That said I wish I could recommend Betterscanning to others, but Doug is absolutely awful at replying to people or fulfilling orders.

Jeremy

 

[pbromaghin]

I never found adding a ruler was very useful for analog film equipment, there is no easy way to determine and apply the correction for that measured focus shift.

You may be right about that. The important thing is to get it repaired back to original specs.

When my Mamiya had this problem I hadn't ever heard of it before and didn't really understand what the problem was. So I figured out my own test on a completely different scale using masking tape at measured distances on the garage wall, and shooting the 80, 135 and 180 lenses at 45 degrees from 5, 10, and 15 feet. Using the pythagorean theorem and the formula for calculating focal distance from the subject distance for various focal lengths, it did show (through some gawdawefully torturous algebra) the ground glass distance to be 1 mm shorter. The results of all 9 calculations based on the photos were remarkably consistent for all lenses and distances.

This yielded way more data and precision than was necessary. After all, the repairman didn't need to know any of that in order to fix it. But it was a fun brain exercise to use 50-year-old math skills.

 

[itsdoable]

I never found adding a ruler was very useful for analog film equipment, there is no easy way to determine and apply the correction for that measured focus shift.

The idea is not to correct something at focusing, but just to establish whether there is a deviation between focus aid and the focus position at the film, that you would not tolerate, and then get the camera adjusted again.

Exactly, and I have used a ruler (a measuring tape mostly) in the past, but the actual rule was not very useful to detect and correct the issue. I usually place a flat object on a surface with nice texture like the image above - I usually use the concrete patio, which has a checker pattern, but it was covered in snow, so the carpet was used. Interrogating the photo will show you were the line of focus runs in the concrete/carpet, and 1) it should intersect your target (you can determine front or back focus issues) and 2) you can check for field curvature or tilt, which is easier on the concrete with a checker pattern, but can be done on the carpet too. Measurements and rules I leave to the optical bench.

 

[brbo]

Sure. On a low-res image on a forum. Why do I feel like you are close-minded and trying to argue? Anything I show you won't be good enough.

If I haven't spent time with something and learning how to the use the tool myself to the best of the ability, I don't comment on it. Might be worth considering in the future.

I don't know why you get the feeling I'm being close minded? I've owned (and still do) a lot of scanners (from consumer flatbed to drum scanner and most in between) that I've learned to use and know pretty well what particular type of scanner is capable of. So, of course, I'm interested in anything you have to show (that's the opposite of being close minded). Btw, how could I even say that anything you show us is not enough?! Either your scan displays detail way past 1500dpi (that is a generally accepted to be the ballpark of V600) or it doesn't...

Scandig also claims that they can only get 2300 DPI out of an Epson V800/850. My personal experience runs counter to that.

They say they see 2600dpi. My point, though, was that there was something wrong with putting a Hasselblad with a good lens on a tripod, using mirror lock and then judging the quality of the resultant image... by scanning it on an Epson V600.

He might keep sending out his kit to be adjusted for the rest of his life as his scans will never be as sharp as his digital pictures...

 

[Jeremy Mudd]

I don't know why you get the feeling I'm being close minded? I've owned (and still do) a lot of scanners (from consumer flatbed to drum scanner and most in between) that I've learned to use and know pretty well what particular type of scanner is capable of. So, of course, I'm interested in anything you have to show (that's the opposite of being close minded). Btw, how could I even say that anything you show us is not enough?! Either your scan displays detail way past 1500dpi (that is a generally accepted to be the ballpark of V600) or it doesn't...


..

That example you showed is such an exaggeration and nowhere close to the truth. Me pointing that out doesn't mean I have to prove dick to you.

Every image I've posted on the group was scanned with a V600.

I'm done talking to you, welcome to my ignore list. Keep talking, I won't be able to see anything else you say here.

Jeremy

 

[grat]

They say they see 2600dpi. My point, though, was that there was something wrong with putting a Hasselblad with a good lens on a tripod, using mirror lock and then judging the quality of the resultant image... by scanning it on an Epson V600.

He might keep sending out his kit to be adjusted for the rest of his life as his scans will never be as sharp as his digital pictures...

First, the 2600 DPI was only achieved with Silverfast AI Studio, which doesn't come with the scanner.

Secondly, many, many people use a V600 quite successfully, and produce sharp images. The problem with the OP's images is *not* the scanner, unless his scanner is defective-- further, some of his images are sharp, and some aren't, and that kind of disproves the "you can't get sharp images with a v600".

This meme of "oh, Epson scanners are horrible!!!", is not only untrue, in this thread, it's a red herring distracting from the actual problem, which does appear to be an issue with the OP's lens/camera.

 

[MattKing]

It makes no sense arguing about a scanner's capabilities in this thread, if the scanner is being used by someone who is new to scanning.

 

[BrianShaw]

It makes no sense arguing about a scanner's capabilities in this thread, if the scanner is being used by someone who is new to scanning.

It makes even less sense since we can’t get an answer to what the negative looks like unscanned.

Unless, of course, we’ve completely abandoned the original concern.

 

[Jeremy Mudd]

This meme of "oh, Epson scanners are horrible!!!", is not only untrue, in this thread, it's a red herring distracting from the actual problem, which does appear to be an issue with the OP's lens/camera.

Thank you.

Jeremy

 

[shutterfinger]

Don't forget that the US Air Force need a method of determining lens/film resolution in terms of lines per millimeter which resulted in the test target known and used for all types of optical resolution evaluation as 1951 USAF test target. They needed an accurate way of measuring the actual size of objects on film from aerial photography. If you read the instructions for reading the target you use a 10x microscope and determine the smallest line pair that you can distinguish the contrast difference between the lines, not the sharpest lines.
To get 3rd party scanner testing max dpi they have to use the manufacturers max optical resolution or very close to it.

 

[Huss]

I’d be happy to re-scan one of your problem images if you want. So we can rule out your scanner as the issue.

I offered up this freebie... oh well "shrug".

 

[foc]

No answer to @BrianShaw request for how do the negs look like (with a loupe) or to @MattKing request to post an image of the negs.
An answer to either one of these will help eliminate a lot of speculation.

 

[jeffreyg]

As I recall SilverFast has a scanning target that you can use to determine the performance of your scanner. somewhere amongst my stuff I have one and used it to determine the best setting for an individual scanner. It seemed to work for me. i am pleased with the quality of my scans. Now if I can remember where it is, i can be more specific.

http://www.jeffreyglasser.com/

http://www.sculptureandphotography.com/

 

[jeffreyg]

I haven't looked yet but here is their link
https://www.silverfast.com/show/resolution-target/en.html

 

[pentaxuser]

Just keep us posted when you hear back from Hasselblad.

The OP replied "Will do" So he has decided on his course of action and thus aren't we trying to solve a problem for which the OP has already chosen a course of action

Might it not make sense to await his "Will do" promise to faberryman and thus the rest of us. I say this in the spirit of avoiding everybody wasting more time until we either hear his good news, namely fixed by Hasselblad's CLA or sad news that nothing has changed and the OP and we are all "back to the drawing board"

pentaxuser

 

[BrianShaw]

The OP replied "Will do" So he has decided on his course of action and thus aren't we trying to solve a problem for which the OP has already chosen a course of action

Might it not make sense to await his "Will do" promise to faberryman and thus the rest of us. I say this in the spirit of avoiding everybody wasting more time until we either hear his good news, namely fixed by Hasselblad's CLA or sad news that nothing has changed and the OP and we are all "back to the drawing board"

pentaxuser

Perhaps you should close the thread. LOL. It’s still worth trying to get a response… otherwise some of us might get the impression that we’ve been ignored and then dismissed.

whether or not the camera servicing has anything to do with the problem, it’s a worthwhile investment.

 

[pentaxuser]

Brian I think we will get such a response when Hasselblad does the CLA, sends the camera back and the OP uses it

Based on at least one of his posts he appears to remain convinced that his scanner is not or as he put it NOT the problem. He may have to change his mind of course depending on whether the CLA cures his problem

If as your next door neighbour I was having a problem with my mower and you has given me advice but in the end I had chosen to say: Thanks but I've sent it for a service and I'll tell you whether this has cured the problem when it's returned, then at that point I think the next time you saw me you'd talk to me about something else until you were told by me that it was back and still doing a crap job cutting the grass

Is that not a good analogy with where we are with the OP and his Hasselblad problem?

pentaxuser

 

[BrianShaw]

Is that not a good analogy with where we are with the OP and his Hasselblad problem?

Well, with one exception. It's more like Mrs, Kravitz telling you and me what we should or should not talk about. No matter... might it not make sense that you do what you choose and the rest of us will do as we choose? We are all big boys and/or girls. If you want to wait-and-see that's fine. Some of us think that there is still something to discuss. Of course, if there are continued non-responses then perhaps there isn't. It's all good, as the youngsters say.

Just in case, here is a reference:
https://bewitched.fandom.com/wiki/Gladys_Kravitz

 

[faberryman]

Is that not a good analogy with where we are with the OP and his Hasselblad problem?

I am not sure why you need to use a lawn mower analogy to convey that the OP has sent his cameras and lenses to Hasselblad for evaluation and repair. It is not really that difficult a concept to grasp.

 

[Jeremy Mudd]

Wow, lawnmowers and a Bewitched reference, all in one thread.



Jeremy

 

[Sirius Glass]

Wow, lawnmowers and a Bewitched reference, all in one thread.



Jeremy

What is "Cutting the grass." in French?

Mow de lawn."​

 

[Sirius Glass]

I will what for the OP's response after he gets the camera back, but I will not hold my breathe until that happens. It will happen in its own timing.

 

[shutterfinger]

s I recall SilverFast has a scanning target that you can use to determine the performance of your scanner.

I haven't looked yet but here is their link
https://www.silverfast.com/show/resolution-target/en.html

Their version of the 1951 USAF test target. Not as pricey as some
https://www.edmundoptics.com/f/1951-usaf-glass-slide-resolution-targets/12064/
https://www.appliedimage.com/produc...ts/usaf-1951-standard-resolution-target-t-20/
https://www.maxlevy.com/product/DA005.html

 

[pentaxuser]

I am not sure why you need to use a lawn mover analogy to convey that the OP has sent his cameras and lenses to Hasselblad for evaluation and repair. It is not really that difficult a concept to grasp.

What can I say? It seemed reasonable to me. Just repeating that the OP has decided he wasn't looking for any more help but would report back sounded like I was trying to imply that Brian needed simply to re-read the OP's last 2 posts

Brian's right of course in that some members enjoy a debate over whether scanning issues might play a part irrespective of whether the OP want to heed what is then said or not and that's fine.

pentaxuser

 

[DREW WILEY]

Handheld says it all. Until that is rectified, nothing else matters. MF is a different ballgame, with its own learning curve.