*sigh* Scanning 8x10 negs/transparencies

[Ian Grant]

And with the V750.


Ian

 

[Soulstar89]

A quick Google search will turn up several suppliers of AN Glass, but it isn't cheap. Glad to find you've discovered an alternative.

Epson supplied a rather flimsy mask for scanning 10x8 with the 800-series scanners. It's easy enough to make some sort of position guide out of black card.

Hey David. The ones in uk I found is knight optical and rapid eye in Shoreditch.

The knight optical website didn’t instill much confidence in me. I gave them a call this morning and was instructed to send a email as a different department handles anti newton glass. I would love to know where these companies get them from.

Rapid eye only seems to have 5x4 glass.

When I get back I’ll write up a post about my testings. It will be a good reference for people interested in scanning. It’s a slow process but results are much improved.

 

[Soulstar89]

And with the V750.

View attachment 6109
Ian

I have the exact same

 

[Nas]

Hey David. The ones in uk I found is knight optical and rapid eye in Shoreditch.

I bought a sheet of ANR glass from knight optical around 15 years ago and still use it on my V700. I handle it with lint free gloves. It's slightly larger than a 10x8 sheet of film. This evening I scanned some 10x8 negs by laying them directly on the platen, emulsion up without any ANR glass on top and got tons of newton rings. The interesting thing is the scans are incredibly sharp without any sharpening applied. This goes against the video linked to further up this thread about shimming the glass anything up to 5mm.

This is also an option although quite expensive once you factor in shipping to the UK and probably customs on top:

Flatbed Film Mounting Station for Fluid Mounting Wet Mounting

 

[Dave_P]

This evening I scanned some 10x8 negs by laying them directly on the platen, emulsion up without any ANR glass on top and got tons of newton rings.

I scan 10x8 directly on the bed with emulsion down and never have had a single case of Newton's Rings. Why scan emulsion up?

 

[Nas]

I scan 10x8 directly on the bed with emulsion down and never have had a single case of Newton's Rings. Why scan emulsion up?

Because that's how you're meant to load film into the holders. I'll try emulsion down next time. I've got a feeling I've already tried it some years ago and it didn't prevent the newton rings.

 

[David M]

If I remember rightly, you need to engage mirroring when you scan emulsion down. The surface of the emulsion seems to be rough enough to remove Sir Isaac’s annoying phenomenon.

 

[Dave_P]

Because that's how you're meant to load film into the holders. I'll try emulsion down next time. I've got a feeling I've already tried it some years ago and it didn't prevent the newton rings.

I can't imagine why Epson advise to put the film "with the shiny side facing down" given it causes this very issue.

In relation to your earlier post about getting sharp scans directly on the glass - this is exactly as expected when scanning 10x8" using the Film Area Guide setting (focus is on the scanner bed). It's when scanning film in holders, which scans a narrower strip roughly 5" wide where you need to jack the film up a few mm off the bed to find the correct focus.

 

[Ian Grant]

If I remember rightly, you need to engage mirroring when you scan emulsion down. The surface of the emulsion seems to be rough enough to remove Sir Isaac’s annoying phenomenon.

The reason for scanning with the emulsion up is to avoid the scanner focusing on the emulsion surface where the supercoating can be quite rough. When the first Digital Minilabs were introduced there was major apparent graininess with Kodak colour films, but not Fuji or Agfa. etc..

This was down to emulsion hardening, and C41 negatives processed at 37ºC and colder wash water. Kodak improved their emulsion and the issue was largely resolved. They further improved hardening after significant research, around the time they upgraded Tmax films 17 or 18 years ago. Kodak Colour and B&W film datasheets mention being improved for scanning.

The surface artefacts of film emulsions have been known about for 100 years. The 1927 BJP Almanac has a precis of a 1926 article on wet mounting miniature negatives for enlargements.

Ian

Correction 1928 BJP Almanac

 

[Soulstar89]

I bought a sheet of ANR glass from knight optical around 15 years ago and still use it on my V700. I handle it with lint free gloves. It's slightly larger than a 10x8 sheet of film. This evening I scanned some 10x8 negs by laying them directly on the platen, emulsion up without any ANR glass on top and got tons of newton rings. The interesting thing is the scans are incredibly sharp without any sharpening applied. This goes against the video linked to further up this thread about shimming the glass anything up to 5mm.

This is also an option although quite expensive once you factor in shipping to the UK and probably customs on top:

Flatbed Film Mounting Station for Fluid Mounting Wet Mounting

It’s reassuring to know someone who bought from knight optical.

I had some time to actually review my test of the museum anti reflective glass and the Epson 4x5 film holder with the acrylic ANR glass.

Firstly I made a mistake on my the setting of the “document source”. For scanning with film holders with Epson software you select “transparency unit” and for scanning 8x10 or scanning direct on scanner glass it’s “transparency unit with area guide. I scanned the film holder on wrong setting, hence why they were noticeably softer.

I rescanned the negative, from a test shoot when I got nikkor 210mm f5.6. I know it’s clinically sharp by examining on a light box with a loupe.

Setup. Strobes. Butterfly light with reflector under chin. Added half a stop for bellows and half a stop for skin tone. Shot at f16 but metered strobes at f22 for compensation. I focused on the eyelashes and tilted to chin.

Once scanned flat, I have only set the black and white point and the slightest curves which is the same on both. No other editing.

To me the difference is in the grain in the out of focus areas. The film holder is ever so slightly smoother. Other than that I see no difference. The uploads look darker here, compared to the exported files, possibly also due to the forum compressing them.

Film holder



Museum anti reflective glass