Using a GFX100: to "scan" 120 MF and 4x5 negatives. What's needed? Is Negative Supply rig good?

[cayenne]

Hello all!!

I currently shoot a number of 120 film cameras....from 6x6 up to 6x17.

I'm looking potentially to get a 4x5 camera to shoot both film and experiment with using my Fuji GFX100 as a "digital back" on it.

That got me to thinking. While my current set up using a tray system on my Epson V600 has worked pretty well for my 120 negatives....with the GFX100...I could get some pretty high resolution images of these negatives at regular shots, and if I used the pixel shift capabilities to shoot negatives, I could likely start approaching drum scan fidelity?

Yes...this led to a bad case of GAS....I started looking at what it takes to build a decent digital camera scanning rig.

That let me to a company called Negative Supply.

They have what appears to be sets with good light sources and the apparatus to mount and move your camera, as well as trays for holding negatives all with leveling legs which would help a lot I'd think as that that is important for accurate image capture.

But like with most nice photog gear, they get pricey pretty quickly.

So, asking if anyone out there has experience with NS and their systems and could offer advice.

Also, could anyone suggest alternatives...what is a quality light source?

What is a quality tray system for holding negattives? (If I'm going to do it, I'd like to do it right and get MF and LF holders and likely be able to add 35mm easily later)

And...what about the tower that you mount the camera to (I don't know the technical term for this)? That would seem to be an important considerations to hold what will be a pretty heavy camera steady and level.

I was thinking I'd be shooting with the GFX100 and the 120mm macro lens I have.

Am I missing anything?

Anyway, I was hoping I could tap into the vast pool of knowledge to help me get a start on research on a solid rig to set up for this.

Thank you in advance,

cayenne

 

[grat]

For a questionably cheap LED panel that works rather well for digitizing, I suggest the Raleno PLV-S192 LED panel. It's about 10.5x7.5", has 192 LEDs (hence the name), has color temperature control, and is 95+ CRI.

The negative supply stuff is very good, but for an el cheapo combo, it's hard to beat the Raleno + Pixl-Latr setup.

 

[Adrian Bacon]

What is a quality tray system for holding negattives? (If I'm going to do it, I'd like to do it right and get MF and LF holders and likely be able to add 35mm easily later)

Negative supply is not bad, but if you want fairly inexpensive, enlarger negative carriers are cheap and easy to get on eBay. I have a full set of them up to 4x5 for the Omega Super Chromega DII line of enlargers that I use. I also have that actual enlarger, so use the same carrier in the enlarger as well as for scanning. Imagine that. They work a treat.

I also have the Negative Supply system, minus their light source. I switch between the two system depending on what I need to do.

For light sources, the Negative Supply ones are great, but if possible, I would recommend a light source that is full spectrum like an enlarger bulb or a strobe as you'll get generally better results.

 

[wiltw]

"to 'scan' 120 MF and 4x5 negatives...What's needed?"
Something very important...software which can convert a dSLR image of a film image on an orange film base, and convert the negative image into a positive interpretation with proper exposure and contrast and color balance while neutralizing the orange base. There are threads on this subtopic, but there seems to be little concensus about programs that do that well without a lot of fuss by the photographer using the program to tweak the image to look better than the inital conversion effort. Scanners doing 'scan negative' seem to do a better job of the conversion with less required bother by the photographer.

 

[NortheastPhotographic]

You're on the right track. Get the NS tools you need and use your GFX100 in standard capture and pixel shift mode. It will yield excellent results. The only thing I'd add is that your GFX 100 calls for a VERY sturdy copy stand. Do not try to skimp in that department. I use a Bessler CS 20 and it's fantastic. Super heavy, very precise. You can experiment with the other options for holders on the market, some might be great I really don't know. The NS tools are proven however and so a safe buy if you just want to get it over with.

 

[cayenne]

"to 'scan' 120 MF and 4x5 negatives...What's needed?"
Something very important...software which can convert a dSLR image of a film image on an orange film base, and convert the negative image into a positive interpretation with proper exposure and contrast and color balance while neutralizing the orange base. There are threads on this subtopic, but there seems to be little concensus about programs that do that well without a lot of fuss by the photographer using the program to tweak the image to look better than the inital conversion effort. Scanners doing 'scan negative' seem to do a better job of the conversion with less required bother by the photographer.

I don't actually mind playing with it.
I've been experimenting with Capture One and some tutorials I've read and watched to manually convert my scans from color and B&W negatives to positives. With C1, it's just really a matter of creating layers.
I do one layer where it invert the image.
Then the next one, I use the non-exposed edge of the negative to set the white balance.
I do the next one, for color...to correct for color...this is where the fun begins and I'm still learning. But I set the levels adjustment to be RGB and I start by going to each color (R, then G then B)...and adjust the levels for shadows and highlights on each end on each color to where the levels begin to be non-zero..and that seems to do a great job on getting the color right.
Yes, I'm winging it a bit, but being I'm shooting at RAW on these with the camera, I have lots of room to play with. I may not get the exact "classic" look of the film, but I"ll do it to where I like it.
I'm thinking I"ll set up pre-sets or styles as I think they call it on C1, to different types of film (I try to only use a few types) and I'll have variations of this for different lighting situations as I come across them...so, after awhile I should have some one click settings to give a really good start to each image, which is essentially what you get with the programs like Negative Lab Pro, I believe.

Anyway...so far, it's not rocket surgery and is fun.

C

 

[cayenne]

You're on the right track. Get the NS tools you need and use your GFX100 in standard capture and pixel shift mode. It will yield excellent results. The only thing I'd add is that your GFX 100 calls for a VERY sturdy copy stand. Do not try to skimp in that department. I use a Bessler CS 20 and it's fantastic. Super heavy, very precise. You can experiment with the other options for holders on the market, some might be great I really don't know. The NS tools are proven however and so a safe buy if you just want to get it over with.

Thank you. I just got a copy stand off eBay that is quite large and seems about as heavy as any would be. I may get a clamp, however, to really secure the base to my working table for even more steadiness.
The only problem I found with it, is that after I set it up...it appears the screw that "locks" the part that holds the camera to where you wan it, is broken or missing.
However, for now, I've bought some clamps that I think I can use to lock the camera in at the height I want. The camera holder part is counter balanced with a spring and not a weight I believe....so, this should be ok.

The one I got is not easy to look up, maybe due to age, it says Super Repro and under that is says IFF.

I've been trying to look this up....closes I can find is that maybe at some point towards the end of the run of this thing, is that Manfrotto maybe have bought them out, as the I've found some reference to Manfrotton Super Repro.....but nothing that seems to match mine.

I bought the tallest one I could find that tops out at 42".

I need tall to be able to get the 6x17 MF negatives in one shot. I want to try this rather than take multiple images of this (or even 4x5 when I get one of those cameras) and stitch them together.

I figure with the GFX I can crop in and not lose resolution. That being said, I will experiment with multiple shots for each image and stitching....to see what I like best, but I wanted to have the option of a non-stitched solution for large negatives. I want to have a fully RAW workflow with the "scanned" negatives for a much of the process as I can.

Anyway, I got this stand. (Negative Supplies largest stand didn't seem to go as tall as I wanted and that's well north of $1K).
From NS I got their 4x5 light source, and their 4x5 set up. Their medium format reader, isn't wide enough to cover the 6x17 and 6x12 MF shots I'm shooing mostly. That being said, I am saving up to get that 120 holder from NS as that it would be quite handy for my 6x6 and 6x9 I'm shooting...but can't spend so much money at once.
I like to stay debt free, so I save and buy what I can pay for.


I figure with the 4x5, I can put ANY negatives I shoot (including the pano 35mm I'm playing with) between the two sheets of anti-Newton acrylic that came with the 4x5 holder and that will get me going quite well to start with.

It's all very exciting and the equipment is now just about all here....so I plan to start shooting negatives soon.

The only PITA...is that my long trusty Macbook pro, 15" late 2011...apparently succumbed to what is apparently a well know GPU problem. I was planning to use this to tether to my GFX for scanning. I really want this rather than climbing on chairs or stools to get high enough to see the back panel of the camera for focus, etc.
I found a place that will do a replacement of the GPU for me for about $150...I bought some tools to take the back off the computer and will pull the HD out of it before I ship it later this week.

Anyway...lots going on. Till I have the tethering computer I'll try to use the iPhone/iPad fuji app to focus and trip the shutter for my initial experiments with the set up.

Thank you for the respone to this thread.....and please keep commenting if you have anything to advise me!!

C

 

[NortheastPhotographic]

Thank you. I just got a copy stand off eBay that is quite large and seems about as heavy as any would be. I may get a clamp, however, to really secure the base to my working table for even more steadiness.


I bought the tallest one I could find that tops out at 42".

One thing you might try is using the Sigma 70/2.8 Macro ART lens on your GFX with an adapter. You might have coverage at the extreme ends of the frame but the GFX sensor is so high res that I doubt this will be much of an issue, and it will allow you to work much closer to your film. I use this lens on my S1R and it's perfect for scanning. I can do 35mm - 8x10 with one lens and one copy stand.

The only other note I have right now is that it's gotten exceedingly clear to me that your room should be dark when camera scanning. Surface reflections on the film are sometimes hard to see but your camera will pick them up and they're a PITA to deal with.

 

[cramej]

I figure with the GFX I can crop in and not lose resolution. That being said, I will experiment with multiple shots for each image and stitching....to see what I like best, but I wanted to have the option of a non-stitched solution for large negatives. I want to have a fully RAW workflow with the "scanned" negatives for a much of the process as I can.

You're really shorting yourself by doing 1 shot 6x17. There will barely even be 4000 pixels on the short side and at that resolution it seems like a waste of effort and money. Even just one stitch and you will almost double the number of pixels available.

Check your version of Capture One for compatibility with the tethering plugin for the GFX. LR, Capture One, etc. don't support OSX that far back as the 2011 Macbook can only go up to 10.7.

 

[NortheastPhotographic]

You're really shorting yourself by doing 1 shot 6x17. There will barely even be 4000 pixels on the short side and at that resolution it seems like a waste of effort and money. Even just one stitch and you will almost double the number of pixels available.

Check your version of Capture One for compatibility with the tethering plugin for the GFX. LR, Capture One, etc. don't support OSX that far back as the 2011 Macbook can only go up to 10.7.

He'll be cropping down from a 400mp file if he uses pixel shift.

 

[cayenne]

One thing you might try is using the Sigma 70/2.8 Macro ART lens on your GFX with an adapter. You might have coverage at the extreme ends of the frame but the GFX sensor is so high res that I doubt this will be much of an issue, and it will allow you to work much closer to your film. I use this lens on my S1R and it's perfect for scanning. I can do 35mm - 8x10 with one lens and one copy stand.

The only other note I have right now is that it's gotten exceedingly clear to me that your room should be dark when camera scanning. Surface reflections on the film are sometimes hard to see but your camera will pick them up and they're a PITA to deal with.

OH thank you for the suggestion!!

I'll look into that lens!!

I currently have the GF120 macro lens and will start with that....but lemme look into that Sigma one too!!

I've seen that it is recommended to have darkness in room. I may have to do my scanning at night then, as that this room has windows. The blinds there don't dark it out.

I'm also wondering what I need to do in terms of maybe constructing some rudimentary "masks" for the various aspect ratio negatives I'm shooting, so as to block excess light around the negatives on the light table.

Do you do this too? If so, any advice on that?

Thank you,

C

 

[cayenne]

You're really shorting yourself by doing 1 shot 6x17. There will barely even be 4000 pixels on the short side and at that resolution it seems like a waste of effort and money. Even just one stitch and you will almost double the number of pixels available.

Check your version of Capture One for compatibility with the tethering plugin for the GFX. LR, Capture One, etc. don't support OSX that far back as the 2011 Macbook can only go up to 10.7.

I've actually tethered the GFX100 to the said MacBook Pro with C1 (version before the current one) successfully in the past.

I was toying with doing the pixel shifting the GFX has and thinking that on special images this 400MP image would be sufficient to crop in and still have plenty of resolution to spare?

Again I'm not locked in on this solution, but was wanting to experiment with it. I am going to also experiment with multi-shot scans and stitching, but thought if I could take this extra step out, it would streamline things.

But thank you for that information....it definitely makes sense and I'll definitely work with this and experiment both ways.

Much appreciated!!
C

 

[cramej]

I've actually tethered the GFX100 to the said MacBook Pro with C1 (version before the current one) successfully in the past.

I was toying with doing the pixel shifting the GFX has and thinking that on special images this 400MP image would be sufficient to crop in and still have plenty of resolution to spare?

Again I'm not locked in on this solution, but was wanting to experiment with it. I am going to also experiment with multi-shot scans and stitching, but thought if I could take this extra step out, it would streamline things.

But thank you for that information....it definitely makes sense and I'll definitely work with this and experiment both ways.

Much appreciated!!
C

 

[Adrian Bacon]

One thing you might try is using the Sigma 70/2.8 Macro ART lens on your GFX with an adapter. You might have coverage at the extreme ends of the frame but the GFX sensor is so high res that I doubt this will be much of an issue, and it will allow you to work much closer to your film. I use this lens on my S1R and it's perfect for scanning. I can do 35mm - 8x10 with one lens and one copy stand.

The only other note I have right now is that it's gotten exceedingly clear to me that your room should be dark when camera scanning. Surface reflections on the film are sometimes hard to see but your camera will pick them up and they're a PITA to deal with.

I use that same lens on a 90D. It is *stellar*. If you’re going to spend money on a lens, that sigma is tough to beat.

 

[NortheastPhotographic]

I've actually tethered the GFX100 to the said MacBook Pro with C1 (version before the current one) successfully in the past.

I was toying with doing the pixel shifting the GFX has and thinking that on special images this 400MP image would be sufficient to crop in and still have plenty of resolution to spare?

Again I'm not locked in on this solution, but was wanting to experiment with it. I am going to also experiment with multi-shot scans and stitching, but thought if I could take this extra step out, it would streamline things.

But thank you for that information....it definitely makes sense and I'll definitely work with this and experiment both ways.

Much appreciated!!
C

It's not just the resolution... IMHO the pixel shifted scans are great because you're getting a true RGB capture, so the best possible color your camera can make and the lowest noise floor. They're pretty remarkable to work with and I would bet give drum scans a run for their money. That being said, the files are HUGE! Your best bet is to honestly do the pixel shifted capture and downsample to a reasonable file size...often the native res of the sensor. Put one side by side with a standard capture and you'll see the difference. But of course on the other end, when making large prints the 400mp files will be great. The hardest part is cleaning up your work space to make the cleanest captures, both from a dust perspective and a light perspective. Mask everything, and block light in the room...even monitor light from the computer you're tethering in to.

 

[cayenne]

It's not just the resolution... IMHO the pixel shifted scans are great because you're getting a true RGB capture, so the best possible color your camera can make and the lowest noise floor. They're pretty remarkable to work with and I would bet give drum scans a run for their money. That being said, the files are HUGE! Your best bet is to honestly do the pixel shifted capture and downsample to a reasonable file size...often the native res of the sensor. Put one side by side with a standard capture and you'll see the difference. But of course on the other end, when making large prints the 400mp files will be great. The hardest part is cleaning up your work space to make the cleanest captures, both from a dust perspective and a light perspective. Mask everything, and block light in the room...even monitor light from the computer you're tethering in to.

Yup, in the back of my head, I was wondering how close to Drum Scan I could get with fidelity....

LOL, I'm already looking to expand my hard drive set up. I"ve been researching a couple of new NAS unit...or at least one, and then get a multi-drive NAS type thing that I can hang directly off my working computer, non-networked...hopefully a thunderbolt one.
I'd like to have that for local work storage and then a NAS that matches it with size and number of drives to backup my working set up to. At some point, I'm going to maybe look into a service like BackBlaze to actually backup to offsite.

But can't do it all at once. But I do see a LOT of new storage requirements coming my way.

One step at a time.

Right now, Im about to get my old MBP I"d planned on for tethering to the GFX for scanning shipped off to get the GPU problem addressed. I'll start scanning in earnest when I get that back. But in the mean time, I plan to get on a step stool and try to focus on camera and do a scan or two on a couple of negatives I have and start to learn that process and see which way I wanna go....I'll first experiment with trying to shoot my 6x17 shots in one shot, vs scanning them a bit closer with multiple pictures and stitching them. I'll play with regular 100mp shots and also with pixel shift 400 MP shots.

This is going to be quite an adventure, but I think I should be able to come up with some really good scans, and then I'll try to translate that into large prints. I just feel images that aren't on a wall are largely wasted.

C

 

[wiltw]

I don't actually mind playing with it.
I've been experimenting with Capture One and some tutorials I've read and watched to manually convert my scans from color and B&W negatives to positives. With C1, it's just really a matter of creating layers.
I do one layer where it invert the image.
Then the next one, I use the non-exposed edge of the negative to set the white balance.
I do the next one, for color...to correct for color...this is where the fun begins and I'm still learning. But I set the levels adjustment to be RGB and I start by going to each color (R, then G then B)...and adjust the levels for shadows and highlights on each end on each color to where the levels begin to be non-zero..and that seems to do a great job on getting the color right.
Yes, I'm winging it a bit, but being I'm shooting at RAW on these with the camera, I have lots of room to play with. I may not get the exact "classic" look of the film, but I"ll do it to where I like it.
I'm thinking I"ll set up pre-sets or styles as I think they call it on C1, to different types of film (I try to only use a few types) and I'll have variations of this for different lighting situations as I come across them...so, after awhile I should have some one click settings to give a really good start to each image, which is essentially what you get with the programs like Negative Lab Pro, I believe.

Anyway...so far, it's not rocket surgery and is fun.

C

It is not as easy as one would think. I scanned a negative as if it were a positive, and then tried photo editing software to turn the negative scan into a positive image using the built in function. Not terrific results (middle photo), compared to simply letting the scanner software do the conversion (bottom photo)

Scanned neg, no conversion...

Converted neg-to-positive...

Scanner software embedded conversion of negative...

 

[grat]

Did you scan the same side of the negative in both cases? Your manual inversion is flipped from the scanner inverted version

.

Having said that, I took your scanned-as-positive, and ran it through Darktable. I think I overcooked the highlights a bit, but it's much closer to your "processed by scanner" image than your manual inversion.

 

[brbo]

It's not just the resolution... IMHO the pixel shifted scans are great because you're getting a true RGB capture, so the best possible color your camera can make and the lowest noise floor. They're pretty remarkable to work with and I would bet give drum scans a run for their money. That being said, the files are HUGE! Your best bet is to honestly do the pixel shifted capture and downsample to a reasonable file size...often the native res of the sensor. Put one side by side with a standard capture and you'll see the difference.

Can you point out the differences for me? Which one is pixel-shifted?

 

[NortheastPhotographic]

Can you point out the differences for me? Which one is pixel-shifted?

From a web resolution shot, of course not. You see the difference when doing either very large prints, or when doing significant shadow recovery. I'm not such a purist to say that one should always scan with PS on, but if I was building a rig I'd want to know I could do it. With a GFX you can probably get away with mostly not using it, but if I was scanning 8x10 for anything above 20x24 I'd want to use it. With the S1R you have 47mp over a 3:2 sensor. Ok, 35mm is probably fine...but what about 6x6? You're suddenly dumping a lot of that 47mp. Well, turn on pixel shift and suddenly you go from a roughly 20mp square image to a roughly 120mp image. If you're never doing large prints, maybe all this is just academic, but I need to satisfy customers, each of which have their own plans and needs.

 

[brbo]

Can you show us some examples of better colours ("true RGB"), shadows... in pixel shift scans? I've done a number ob side-by-side scans and (as much as I want to) can't see it.

 

[NortheastPhotographic]

Can you show us some examples of better colours ("true RGB"), shadows... in pixel shift scans? I've done a number ob side-by-side scans and (as much as I want to) can't see it.

Not really something you can convey over the web, and it would take hours to put together a series of sample scans produced one way, then another way, then web sized... You need to scan a lot to see the difference, especially dense chromes that need shadow salvaging. It's sort of like how drum scan samples are not obviously better over the web. You have to spend a lot of time working with the files. But if you can't see it that's fine. There are no rules, scan however you want.

 

[wiltw]

Did you scan the same side of the negative in both cases? Your manual inversion is flipped from the scanner inverted version

. View attachment 280793 Having said that, I took your scanned-as-positive, and ran it through Darktable. I think I overcooked the highlights a bit, but it's much closer to your "processed by scanner" image than your manual inversion.

Yeah well aware of the flip...the neg scan vs. the neg-as-positive scan on flatbed were from two different sessions and I was obviously not careful in one of them. Given that it was a trial of neg-image-to-positive, I really didn't take any care to scan orientation.

Hmmm...Darktable looks not bad! better than the neg-to-positive result from Photoshop Pro that I got. I had considered using dSLR 'scan' but never started, looking for a reasonable quality neg-to-positive conversion. Thx!

 

[Dismayed]

"to 'scan' 120 MF and 4x5 negatives...What's needed?"
Something very important...software which can convert a dSLR image of a film image on an orange film base, and convert the negative image into a positive interpretation with proper exposure and contrast and color balance while neutralizing the orange base. There are threads on this subtopic, but there seems to be little concensus about programs that do that well without a lot of fuss by the photographer using the program to tweak the image to look better than the inital conversion effort. Scanners doing 'scan negative' seem to do a better job of the conversion with less required bother by the photographer.

The ColorPerfect Plugin works well, but the UI is unusual. There's a demo version available.

https://www.colorperfect.com/colorperfect.html?lang=en

 

[Tom Kershaw]

The ColorPerfect Plugin works well, but the UI is unusual. There's a demo version available.

https://www.colorperfect.com/colorperfect.html?lang=en

Try as I have, I've not been able to find a way that converts colour negative to positive as well as ColorPerfect. It is a strange situation really, in that there seem to be few satisfactory options, certainly outside the the realm of Adobe centric solutions. The method of manually dividing out a film base sample from the image, and then using adjustment curves gives an odd looking image to my eyes.

I was looking through some of my old C-41 contact sheets yesterday and the colour quality is excellent in most cases - this was on the discontinued Kodak Supra Endura paper.