Wetmounting & Mylar for flatbeds

Hello,

I'm going to start scanning some 35mm, medium, and large format negatives with my Epson 4990. I don't have the money for a dedicated film scanner or to send them out to be drum scanned, but would like to get the most out of my current scanner.

So, I've read up some about wetmounting, and have come across the Aztek and ScanScience products. My question is, do you think its worth spending the money on one of these units, or could I make something myself to use? I want to try to keep costs low, and the price for kits seems fairly costly, and also the fluid is expensive. Perhaps there is some other (cheaper) alternative to these pro fluids? Also, I have read that people used Mylar to hold the negatives in place, can anyone suggest a place on the net to order some cheap and any other supplies I'd need to build a wetmounting set up?

Thanks for all your help.

Regards,
Martin

Hi Martin,

Wetmounting is the only way to go for scanning film on a flatbed. You don't necessarily have to build a wet mounting rig for your scanner. On your scanner you probably don't want to mount directly to your scanner glass and risk leaking fluid into the scanner body. One technique that you can try is to get a seperate pane of glass. You will use this glass as your mounting surface. Once the neg is mounted and any excess fluid is removed, turn the glass upside down so that the acetate part of the sandwich is facing down. Simply lay the mount (in this order) acetate/neg/glass on your scanner's glass. This accomplishes two things: 1.) reduces the risk of getting fluid in your scanner, and 2.) preserves quality by not having to scan through an additional piece of glass. I have personaly not used this method but I have heard of others doing it this way and theoreticaly, it makes sense.

Regarding the supplies you will need: DO NOT skimp on quality fluid and acetate sheets!! I cannot stress this enough. If you are going to go to the trouble of wetmounting, you obviously want the best quality you can get out of your scanner. Use Aztek's Kami fluid and acetate sheets. There is a reason the stuff is expensive and used by the pros...it works! The ScanScience fluid may be fine but do you really want to take chances with the life of your film? I can also vouch for the fact that Aztek has great customer service.

I hope that helps.

Cheers,
Mark

This is the mounting method I was thinking of following, only that I would use some sort of shims to raise the height to the optimal focus. Any idea on what would work good as shims, and how to find the optimal focus?

I have been following a thread over at LF and posted a similar question there.

Baby oil was suggested as a wet mounting fluid (although only for difficult negatives), so I was thinking of working with that. I don't mind the clean up, although perhaps you're right and I should spend a little extra on something made just for that, such as the Aztek product.

As for the Mylar, I found a source here, and question if its really that different from the Aztek products LINK. I have read of others using normal Mylar like this, without problems.

Thanks for the input so far, hopefully I'll have enough feedback soon, and can get started with this soon.

Thanks,
Martin

Hi Menglert, I have the scansciencs wetmount kit and am quite happy with it. The kit come with everything you need, mylar sheets, fluids for mounting and anti-static cleaner for the bed and mount glass. I was unimpressed with the bed cleaner, was neither non smear nor antistatic in my experience.
I have to say that if you are handy you could make the same thing yourself, I was happy with the price and so was happy to get a ready made kit.
That said I am planning to get Kami when the fluid that came with the kit runs out.

The kit also comes with a mask and some extra masks in various thickness',.25 and .5, these are great for assesing and setting the right distance above the bed for focus. The difference is not inconsiderable so worth including if you were planning to make a kit. I tried various depths etc, including laying the mount on the glass,mylar first, newton rings were a problem.

If you need a visual PM me and I shall post you an image of what is in the kit, you can see what you will get or what you need to consider making.

Gari

Hi guys

very interested in this subject, for several months I managed to get pretty good scans by laying my polaroid type 55 flat on the glass using vuescan, but recently had had nothing but newton ring problems, am currently pulling my hair out

Garri I'd appreciate a look at what is in the kit also, and was it supplied in this country or did you source it from the states

thanks

Couple of remarks.

First, Doug Fisher from Atlanta is developing a mounting system that will allow you to either fluid mount or dry mount on AN glass elevated above the scanner glass. I have beta tested the station and found it to be a very good design, in particular the system used to change the plan of focus to calibrate for position of best focus. As far as I know Doug's mounting station is not yet on the market but it has some interesting features that you might want to wait for.

Second, it is not at all complicated to build your own mounting station. Just have a piece of regular window glass cut to a size that will allow it to fit over the scanner glass snugly. The 2mm or so thickness of window glass will position the focus at close to the point of best focus with most Epson scanners. To use, just remove the glass from the scanner and mount the negative to be scanned. You will need to place some kind of frame or template to position the negative you intend to scan. To mount the material to be scanned, just pour a few drops of the scanning fluid in the center of the frame, place the negative base side down over the fluid, and smooth out the fluid by gently pushing the film with a clean cloth from the center toward the sides and corners until all of the bubbles have been eliminated. Finish by taping down the sides of the negative. I use the blue line masking tape sold in most hardware and it actually works better IMO than the more expensive mounting tapes. You can use a sheet of thin mylar over the negative if you like but I have compared results with and without the mylar with LF negative film and found no advantage at all with the mylar.

Kami mounting fluid is relatively inexpensive and works well, leaving little or no residue on the film. If residue is a problem you can further clean the negative with a suitable negative cleaning solution. Baby oil can be used, but cleaning the negative is harder than with Kami or other solvent type mounting fluids.

I have found a clear improvement in the quality of the scan in fluid mounting LF negatives, and once you get the technique perfected it is not at all complicated or time consumning to do.

In short, you only need three simple things to test fluid mounting: 1) a piece of glass about 2mm thick of the right size to fit into the frame over the existing scanner glass, 2) mounting fluid, and 3) blue masking tape.

Sandy King

Thanks Sandy for the update and useful information. Do you suggest spending the money on the specialized "optical Mylar" such as that sold by Aztek and others, or will normal clear Mylar sold from a plastics distributor work alright?

Regards,
Martin

menglert said:

Thanks Sandy for the update and useful information. Do you suggest spending the money on the specialized "optical Mylar" such as that sold by Aztek and others, or will normal clear Mylar sold from a plastics distributor work alright?

Regards,
Martin

Click to expand...

Any good quality Mylar will work fine. When I use Mylar it is 3 mil material I buy from Light Impressions, which I also used for number of other purposes so it is something I always have on hand anyway. Test with and without Mylar to evaluate if it is worth the trouble. I found no advantage in my own work with LF negatives, but it is possible you might find a difference in really high resolution scans of 35mm and roll film negatives.

Sandy

You really only need the mylar if you do not want to put tape directly on the film, or you are wrapping the film around a drum (in a drum scanner). For the flatbed scanners mylar should not be needed. Maybe if there are scratches on the film (on both sides) you could put scanning fluid on both sides of the film, and seal it in with mylar.... maybe.

sanking said:

Couple of remarks.

If residue is a problem you can further clean the negative with a suitable negative cleaning solution.
Sandy King

Click to expand...

What product are you using Sandy?

Thanks,

Don Bryant

Don Bryant said:

What product are you using Sandy?

Thanks,

Don Bryant

Click to expand...

Don,

I use Edwal Anti-Stat Film Cleaner. After scanning the negative I just rub a small amount of the film cleaner on a clean cotton cloth and rub it over the film until dry.

The Kami anti-stat film cleaner supplied by Aztek also works well.

Sandy

Greg_E said:

You really only need the mylar if you do not want to put tape directly on the film, or you are wrapping the film around a drum (in a drum scanner). For the flatbed scanners mylar should not be needed. Maybe if there are scratches on the film (on both sides) you could put scanning fluid on both sides of the film, and seal it in with mylar.... maybe.

Click to expand...

Good point about the scratches.

In my own work I scan with the negative mounted on top of the glass, base side down. Since the majority of scratches are usually on the base side of the film this procedure works fine in most cases. However, if by chance there are scratches on the emulsion side (facing toward the scanner light) it is a good idea put scanning fluid on this side as well, and seal it with mylar.

Sandy

Thanks for the input and suggestions from everyone. I decided to try making my own unit.

I ordered a roll of .002 clear Mylar, and 1/8" 8.5x11 acrylic sheets and some Kami fluid. I plan to find the optimal focus point, then raise the acrylic up to that point, and sandwich the negatives to the bottom with Mylar and the Kami fluid.

Once I get the supplies and find the time to run some scans I'll try to post a follow up. Thanks again for the advice.

Regards,
Martin