Please share your scanning method

This is more or less my DSLR scanning method. I've been continuously refining the method, but haven't got around to blogging the changes yet.

In terms of resolution and detail, this is as good or better as anything I've ever produced, short of a drum scan. That includes the 9000ED and several models of Imacon/Hasselblad Flextight scanners.

Scanning:

http://mfphotography.ca/blog/2015/1/5/dslr-scanning-update (I now use enlarger film carriers)

Post (colour neg):

http://mfphotography.ca/blog/2015/3/23/colour-film-scanning-revisited-part-2
 
I replaced my Epson V500 by my Nikon D90 + 9 mm extension tube + M42 to Nikon-F-mount adapter + M39 tot M42 adapter + Leitz Elmar 5cm f3.5
My V500 cannot meet the quality of those dSLR 'scans'.
I shoot at f5.6. The negatives are backlit by a digital photoframe which shows just a white rectangle.
I mount my body on a drill press vise, with which i can finetune the focus distance.
The negatives are placed between two pieces of glass (Sometimes, but certainly not always, I have those Newton rings. I have to solve that ...)
My D90 is connected with my PC. So I can see the live view picture in higher reolution + as a positive image. To avoid reflections, I 'scan' in a dark room (not in a darkroom 🙂).

Kind regards,
Tom
 
Imacon

Imacon

I have been using an old Imacon Precision 2 scsi connection (with firewire adapter on an old operating system on an old mac).
The scans are fantastic.
I usually scan flat regarding contrast and then enhance the images after.
I recommend those scanners if you can find one for a decent price.
 
For those scanning color neg with older flatbeds like myself (V500), I thought I'd share what I've been getting the best results from with the least fuss.
This flow specifically relates to Portra 400; don't know how it works with other films - it's the only one I use. Since this method does not involve individual adjustments for each frame, the actual scanning process is much faster; all the balancing/correction/tweaking is done later in Photoshop (in my case, CS6) on an as-needed frame-by-frame basis.

- Scan (with supplied holders; I understand this model has deeper focus than later ones so neg height less critical) with Color Neg setting and all adjustments off ("No Color Correction" as the Epson Scan 'Configuration' option). Select the entire film strip, not individual frames (so includes black frame line/s). This saves a file that could sort of be thought of as RAW output from digicam. It will be very cold, dark and flat. You're basically just using the Epson software to do the inversion; in my experience this results in much wider dynamic range than scanning the neg as a positive then inverting in Photoshop.

- Opening in PS, crop to desired frame, including the black frameline. In Adjustments, choose Auto Tone (in Levels or Curves, set Auto-'Enhance Per Channel Contrast' shadow clipping default to 0.0, Highlights to 0.01), then do Auto Color. With most well-exposed negs this gets you about 90% there. From here Midtone levels and Saturation will need to come up, etc; edit to taste.

To many this may seem like a quick-and-dirty, amateurish method, but don't knock it till you try it! I went the whole 'setting the high and low clipping points of each individual RGB channel' route in both Epson Scan and in PhotoShop, but got results than were no better and in most cases not as good; and as I say the scanning step itself goes much faster.

I'd be curious to know how well this works with other color neg emulsions.
 
I've recently developed a new method for color negative inversion using operations and blending modes directly in Photoshop (and soon Affinity Photo).

This method works similar to software in scanners like the Fuji Frontier and has a basis in RA-4 printing.

The only requirements for perfect inversions are the sampling of the film base and a linear raw scan (preferably 16bit).

The method works much better than any of the software solutions available, or much more expensive tools that fail to deliver on their promises. It does this simply and without doing any unwanted interpretation of the scene

You can find it and read about how to use it at my website.

If you want me to test it on your scans to see it in action, please send me links to your files and I'll gladly invert them.
 
Here are the parts list.
  • Canon 5D Mark IV
  • Canon 100mm 2.8 macro
  • Tripod
  • Einstein Strobe with 7" reflector
  • 1/4" white acrylic
  • 1/8" black mat board
  • C1 software for remote capture

So fare it is better than an Epson v600 flatbed

IMG_0333.jpg

IMG_0334.jpg


IMG_0336.jpg
 
My best film scans so far were with Oly EP 5 and 50/2 Zuiko macro on a copy stand. Then I got Primefilm med. format scanner and it's a bit better for 120 film. Need to try my week-old GX8 (20mpx) and that 50/2 back on the copy stand, but still think it won't pull ahead of the Primefilm. I also tried Sony A7r2 w/90 macro, and 55/2.8 Nikkor on the copy stand, but found the Oly/50 still wins over those lenses for a camera-scanner. I think the m43 pixel density w/good lens=good combo it seems.
 
For most film nowadays, I've moved to a macro copy workflow using a Leica CL fitted with Leica R macro lenses on a copystand and a light box. I do the negative inversions and image adjustment in LR.

This nets 16 Mpixel images from 6x6 or Robot square formats, and up to 24 Mpixel images from rectangular formats depending on how well they fit the 24x16mm sensor format proportions. It's quite good enough for prints in my usual size range.

I have a few boxes of APS film that need scanning. For these, I'll use the Nikon Coolscan V with the dedicated APS film carrier. That makes short work of scanning since I can tell Vuescan to capture an entire roll in one go, and also tell Vuescan to output a processed image as DNG as well as its own raw scan format, suitable for soft rescanning without having to take out the scanner and film again.
 
I have tried quite a few methodes to deal with negative inversion (including ColorPerfect). Finally I have settled on a method that gives consistent result and that is not to time consuming. I give you my 10 steps to try and see if it works for some of you as well, it maybe look complicated but when you learn the workflow it just take a few minutes.

1. Start with a 16-bit linear scan - Silverfast of Vuescan doesn't mather, Epson scan is not perfectly linear but work ok. The scan should contain a bit of unexposed area.
2. Start PS and open the file - with color scans I use to work in Adobe RGB mode. Keep the histogram visably all the time.
3. Use the sample tool and click on the unexposed area (11x11 sample are is fine).
4. Create a new layer and fill it with the sampled color.
5. Invert the new layer and set blending mode to "Color dodge". Your mask should be gone now.
6. Use crop tool to cut away all unexposed film. Don't flatten.
7. Create new curve layer and choose negative from presets meny. Then set a few anchor points to shape a C cure (or inverse C curve depening on you settings in the curves tool). This part is artistic - but typically a steep curve in the highlights that flatten out in the shadows give you nice highlight separation and good contrast. The number of anchor points needed depends on scene, inital exposure and artistic preference - sometimes one point is enough but 3 or 4 is often needed. But keep the curve smooth, no "bumps".
8. Create a new curve layer and drag the far left and far right points inwards to fill upp the histogram. Your image could look heavely posterized by now, but no worries - that is because preview in PS is only 8 bit but the underlying data is 15-bit (not 16, we work in Photoshop) and that is enough to give smooth transistions.
9. Create a new curve layer and use the grey sampler to color balance - this is an artistic choise but I try make is as neutral as I can and leave the fine tuning to later.
10. Flatten image - now you should have a very good starting point to work with in Photoshop, Lightroom, CameraRaw or whatever you prefer.

One example with good highlight separation (at least to my eye):
29327190397_7d6c7c58d6_c.jpg
 
Thanks Bumse (and welcome to RFF) for your detailed explanation which I'll try.
I'm quite satisfied with my Nikon 5000ED and vuescan for B&W but still some problems with color negative!
robert
 
Thank you (didn't realize that this was my first post, I've spend some times reading here without participate in the discussions).

Oh.. one more thing if you try my method. Make sure that Photoshop i set up to "Blend RGB colors using gamma 1.0" found under Color Settings.
 
Wenge said:
My best film scans so far were with Oly EP 5 and 50/2 Zuiko macro on a copy stand. Then I got Primefilm med. format scanner and it's a bit better for 120 film. Need to try my week-old GX8 (20mpx) and that 50/2 back on the copy stand, but still think it won't pull ahead of the Primefilm. I also tried Sony A7r2 w/90 macro, and 55/2.8 Nikkor on the copy stand, but found the Oly/50 still wins over those lenses for a camera-scanner. I think the m43 pixel density w/good lens=good combo it seems.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the comments on lenses for camera-Scanning. In what way did you find the Oly better than the Nikkor 55/2.8? Both are venerable macro lenses.
 
Long time no posts here. Let me add one.
Still using Nikon Coolscan V LS-50 ED for 35mm film and Epson V550 for medium format, both ran on VueScan software. I usually scan into DNG raw. Then comes darkroom to convert raw file and do some post. This satisfy most of my needs. Only exquisite shots, very few of them, will go to a pro lab for a high quality scan. I should mention, B&W film only for me.
 
to be precise I bought/have Primefilm 120 Pro for 120 (it has several diff names i think too in diff countries) and the Plustek for 35mm both are good film scanners. I had good luck with 120 film also using Olympus M4/3 w/older 50mm/2 4/3 macro lens (w/adapter to Oly camera), but you need to tape film flat on white-lit b/g on a ipad or lightbox and copy-stand or tripod, etc. The scanners are alot easier than the camera setup was. not sure if either scanner's still for sale, but works for me. It was fun playing with the Oly and copy stand but the film scanners are easier and imo better using Vuescan as an alt scanner software which allows user full-control.
 
Last edited:
ColSebastianMoran said:
Thanks for the comments on lenses for camera-Scanning. In what way did you find the Oly better than the Nikkor 55/2.8? Both are venerable macro lenses.
Click to expand...
updated comments; found the 50/2 4/3 lens (with adapter to M4/3) just produced finer detail than the Nikkor 55 did in my experience. Plus the Oly 50/2 macro auto-focused spot-on when close to the film, no need to manual focus but with focus peaking it was still easy to do that too, while manual focusing with that 50 was fly-by-wire and not as easy as a/f.

Been awhile since I tried the 55/2.8 on my late/sold Oly EM mk2 but I remember it wasn't as easy to use as the 50. I'd guess also the 55/2.8 on a Nikon would work better, I only rented a Nikon D800 a few days yrs ago but never tried it for film scanning. That entire rigamarole caused me to search for dedicated film scanners for 120 and 35mm, it was just easier for me than the camera/copy stand thing.

I wonder now how the 55/2.8 would handle film scannning with the new Z7 cameras and if I still had both would try it but sold 55/2.8 and my Z6 camera (never tried Z7) or would test it.
 
Last edited:
also: I now use Sony +90/2.8 for macro since last few years after selling M4/3 kit/lenses, but never tried scanning film with it or would offer opinion on it, while I might guess it may work w/ A7r4 or 5.

I sold my Oly 50/2 4/3 lens to KEH or B&H a few months ago (can't recall which after selling dozens of items) so they may still have it on used, near mint, but like mentioned before it's a 4/3 not M4/3 and needs adapter (also sold that mint/used to them).
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom