full frame scanning on coolscan 5000?

furcafe said:
By full-frame, do you mean including the sprocket holes or just the entirety of the image? I can't get the sprocket holes w/the standard SA-21 & the bulk roll feeder (don't know the model # off-hand), but it is wide enough to get the entire "width" (i.e., short side) of the image area (@ least w/Vuescan). Per sojournerphoto's post, perhaps you're using a "Barnack" body or shooting non-retrofocus wide-angles that have a larger film gate/image circle.
Click to expand...

The 9000 will scan the sprockets...

acros-M7II-Pano_sprocket-5-ed-sm.jpg
 
40 minutes ago I took a mill file to the sides of my SA-21 film gate/support rails. Cleaned up the edges with an xacto knife and vacuumed out the dust as best I could. I am now scanning full frame. I hesitate to recommend this as I have no idea about any potential "Side effects", but it seems pretty simple to me.

Cheers,
Gary
 
gns said:
40 minutes ago I took a mill file to the sides of my SA-21 film gate/support rails. Cleaned up the edges with an xacto knife and vacuumed out the dust as best I could. I am now scanning full frame. I hesitate to recommend this as I have no idea about any potential "Side effects", but it seems pretty simple to me.

Cheers,
Gary
Click to expand...

Thanks gns, that's exactly what I had planned to do as well. I had considered it, but now I'll probably do it. How much did you file off? As far as I can tell it's just to support the film edge. Did you remove it entirely from the main holder, or just pop the cap off?
 
clayne,

I didn't take much off. Just over 1/2 mm each side as needed. There is still a little bit of the lip left on the bottom rails (didn't take anything off the upper part). Probably should take off a bit more for slop factor, since the feeder doesn't always position the strip exactly centered left-to-right.

I'm happy with how this worked, but the bigger problem with the SA-21 is poor film flatness. So I'm still going to get the FH3 and try to modify that for full frame.

Cheers,
Gary
 
gns said:
clayne,

I didn't take much off. Just over 1/2 mm each side as needed. There is still a little bit of the lip left on the bottom rails (didn't take anything off the upper part). Probably should take off a bit more for slop factor, since the feeder doesn't always position the strip exactly centered left-to-right.

I'm happy with how this worked, but the bigger problem with the SA-21 is poor film flatness. So I'm still going to get the FH3 and try to modify that for full frame.

Cheers,
Gary
Click to expand...

Yeah. Film flatness is definitely an issue. I think it's kind of a losing battle on that one as it's kind of hard to offer the ability to move from frame to frame via roll feed and also offer film flatness. The two are somewhat mutually exclusive.

I'd think the glass MF carrier for the 9000 would be the best way to go for flatness, if not fluid scanning. I've thought about picking up a 9k for various reasons, how much of a speed difference is there between the 9000 and 5000 for 35mm?
 
I received the FH3 holder yesterday. It too crops a bit of the image area so I went to work on it with the file. It took me a while because there are actually six windows (to hold a six frame strip) in the holder and it is kind of flimsy so you need to be a little careful. I ended up with just a minimal space around the image, so it's a little fussy positioning the film just right. But it works fine and hopefully this will hold the film flatter than the SA-21. We'll see.

Cheers,
Gary
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom