ghost
Well-known
http://www.ajaxnetphoto.blogspot.com/
should be very interesting for owners of flatbed scanners looking for better scans.
should be very interesting for owners of flatbed scanners looking for better scans.
w3rk5
Well-known
Very kewl read. Thanks for posting it up.
RicardoD
Well-known
Very interesting. I am just starting to get into medium format and use an Epson 4180. On my list of things to do is check the focus and see if shimming the negative holder tray improves things. Then perhaps invest in one of the improved slide holding trays from http://www.betterscanning.com/
At this point I would be a bit fearful to open up my 4180 and start painting everything but it does make a lot of sense.
At this point I would be a bit fearful to open up my 4180 and start painting everything but it does make a lot of sense.
jlw
Rangefinder camera pedant
Interesting, yes, but (as is often the case with blog posts) I wonder how much of it might be true and how much might be self-delusion. If I had gone to all that work, I to would certainly want to see a noticeable improvement in the quality of my scans -- might, in fact, want it enough to see an improvement whether it were there or not!
A scanner isn't an exact analogue of an enlarger in terms of its principle of operation (largely because the scanner scans through a slit that's passed across the original) so the whole flat-black-paint thing, for example, is less defensible: it's much less likely that stray light bouncing around inside will be able to find its way through the slit at an angle that will hit the sensor. So when the author writes, "What were the dumbells who designed this machine thinking of?" the correct answer may be that they weren't dumbbells at all -- they were engineers who understand the scanning process perhaps better than the author.
I'm not saying to ignore this whole post: What I'm saying is that if you want to tinker with your scanner's innards in hope of getting better results, you might want to set up some kind of double-blind comparison procedure to make sure the improvement is really there and not just in your hopes. A lot of this technology isn't nearly so esoteric as it's sometimes made out.
A scanner isn't an exact analogue of an enlarger in terms of its principle of operation (largely because the scanner scans through a slit that's passed across the original) so the whole flat-black-paint thing, for example, is less defensible: it's much less likely that stray light bouncing around inside will be able to find its way through the slit at an angle that will hit the sensor. So when the author writes, "What were the dumbells who designed this machine thinking of?" the correct answer may be that they weren't dumbbells at all -- they were engineers who understand the scanning process perhaps better than the author.
I'm not saying to ignore this whole post: What I'm saying is that if you want to tinker with your scanner's innards in hope of getting better results, you might want to set up some kind of double-blind comparison procedure to make sure the improvement is really there and not just in your hopes. A lot of this technology isn't nearly so esoteric as it's sometimes made out.
ghost
Well-known
"Immediately, there was a noticeable improvement in the final scans, particularly in the area of shadow detail where the Heidelberg had not previously been able to extract much detail. Contrast went up and with it, apparent sharpness."
i see no real reason to think he's imagining things.
i see no real reason to think he's imagining things.
w3rk5
Well-known
I'm gonna do this "mod" and I'll post some results soon. In a worst case scenario, I'll be off to get a new scanner. 
DougK
This space left blank
I don't think he's imagining things, but when I've seen issues like that on my flatbed it was caused a smudge on the glass or a negative that wasn't completely flat in the holder. There's too many variables in play and I'm not sure from reading the blog that he adequately controlled for them (first reposition the negative, rescan, clean glass, rescan, then paint surfaces, etc.). I have a feeling cleaning the glass surfaces did more good than the paint.ghost said:
Last edited:
ghost
Well-known
DougK said:
maybe the glass was dirty from the start? naw.
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
Doug: Do some controlled research on your own and report back!
w3rk5
Well-known
Keep in mind, I'm not sure if I'm doing this right. This might be a bad example but here it goes. Which one looks sharper and better contrast. The left or right? These are straight scans.
I'd admit....the difference is small but it's there. It cost me $3 CDN and a little time to do this. I think it was worth it.
I'd admit....the difference is small but it's there. It cost me $3 CDN and a little time to do this. I think it was worth it.
Attachments
Last edited:
RicardoD
Well-known
You can really see the sharpness difference in the letters at the bottom "CRAC" and in the little elf logo. Not bad for $3.
RicardoD
Well-known
w3rk5,
Oh yeah, I assume the picture on the right is the after. What exactly did you do? What model scanner do you own?
Oh yeah, I assume the picture on the right is the after. What exactly did you do? What model scanner do you own?
w3rk5
Well-known
I'll PM you the answer just to see what other people think. I have an EPSON 3490. I know it's nothing special but it does what I need it to do.
I just opened up the unit and applied some "self adhesive black cloth" anywhere I can cover. Then I applied some more on the scanner cover and at the bottom of the film holder tray. I got black cloth from Walmart.........it was less than $1 CDN per sheet. I'll post some pic's tomorrow of my scanner so you can see what I did.
Here's a resized picture of the original. The full size is 4512x2773.
I just opened up the unit and applied some "self adhesive black cloth" anywhere I can cover. Then I applied some more on the scanner cover and at the bottom of the film holder tray. I got black cloth from Walmart.........it was less than $1 CDN per sheet. I'll post some pic's tomorrow of my scanner so you can see what I did.
Here's a resized picture of the original. The full size is 4512x2773.
Attachments
Last edited:
DougK
This space left blank
If I could afford to sacrifice my scanner should something go amiss, I would. I'm willing to wait for more evidence before I come to a final judgement on the whole issue. Seems strange, though, that scanner manufacturers hadn't thought about this issue and accounted for this in their designs.Trius said:
Last edited:
w3rk5
Well-known
Here are some pic's of my scanner after the "mod". I could cover some more areas but I didn't want to waste my time in case it didn't work.
MATERIALS: Self adhesive black cloth bought from Walmart. I used 3 sheets. 1 sheet is about 9x12 inches. If you were to try this maybe you should get 4 or 5 sheets. At less than $1 CDN a piece it's better to have a little more than less.
CAUTION! If you're going to do this mod make sure you know what parts move and what parts must not be taped down (example: the scanners data cable).
I know these pic's aren't the greatest, but the darker areas is where I applied the cloth. The picture on the left shows all the parts I applied it to.
In the middle one, I wanted to seal any light going or leaving the scanner.
The one on the right is just a better shot of the guts of the scanner.
I think this mod was worth it. Oh yeah! Thank you AjaxNetPhoto.com and ghost for posting this up.
MATERIALS: Self adhesive black cloth bought from Walmart. I used 3 sheets. 1 sheet is about 9x12 inches. If you were to try this maybe you should get 4 or 5 sheets. At less than $1 CDN a piece it's better to have a little more than less.
CAUTION! If you're going to do this mod make sure you know what parts move and what parts must not be taped down (example: the scanners data cable).
I know these pic's aren't the greatest, but the darker areas is where I applied the cloth. The picture on the left shows all the parts I applied it to.
In the middle one, I wanted to seal any light going or leaving the scanner.
The one on the right is just a better shot of the guts of the scanner.
I think this mod was worth it.
Oh yeah! Thank you AjaxNetPhoto.com and ghost for posting this up.Attachments
Last edited:
w3rk5
Well-known
Just an update if anyone is interested.........the picture on the "right" was scanned after the mod.
RicardoD
Well-known
Thanks for the update. I may take a look at my scanner and see if I can build up the courage down the road.
I just started medium format scanning this year so I need to take a photo with my Rolleiflex at small aperture of something with text and fine details like you did. Then use that negative to check my scanner focus first then perhaps venture into the black felt mod.
Thanks again for sharing your results.
I just started medium format scanning this year so I need to take a photo with my Rolleiflex at small aperture of something with text and fine details like you did. Then use that negative to check my scanner focus first then perhaps venture into the black felt mod.
Thanks again for sharing your results.
Last edited:
w3rk5
Well-known
No problem Ricardo. I know how you feel about building up the courage to do it. It's easier for me to do cause it's not an expensive model, nor a very good scanner for 35mm film. Still, I'm very happy with it for what it is.
Still, I'm very happy with it for what it is.
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
ghost said:
Unbelievable, but the glass of my brand new epson v700 has a bit of fog on the inside surface (as well as some 2-3 sub-millimetre sized white speckles which are luckily out of the neg scanning frames). I contemplate about opening it up and cleaning the glass.
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
"One side of the image was o.k. the other side slightly fuzzy, as if someone had sprayed the screen image with diluted milk. I cleaned the monitor. It made no difference."
Such sentences decrease the credibility of the whole writing, IMO.
You see fuzzyness on parts of the scan and you try to solve it by cleaning your monitor? Hello??
Such sentences decrease the credibility of the whole writing, IMO.You see fuzzyness on parts of the scan and you try to solve it by cleaning your monitor? Hello??