VaughnB
Newbie
Hi!
I'm currently in the process of learning the best way to scan black and white negatives, and this same question generally nags me each time I get back into scanning--should I focus slightly in front or behind the negative?
I have a Minolta Scan Elite 5400ii, which has the option of manual focus, moving the negative carrier closer and farther away from the CCD. The whole issue of how to focus on a negative came up for me when I read this article:
http://cool.conservation-us.org/coo...itale/2007-04-vitale-filmgrain_resolution.pdf
If you go to page 3, there's a whole section about the supposedly common technique of focusing on the film grain. Here's the snippet that got me thinking:
"The problems of (1) locating a well-focused region of a small piece of film in a 35 mm film frame (24 x 36 mm), (2) evaluating its degree of focus and then (3) focusing that region of the film, explains why “focusing the grain” has become a common default for determining image sharpness. Focusing on the perceived film grain is a misapplication of imaging
resources. Achieving fine detail with crisp contrast differences should be the goal of the imaging process, be it on a flatbed or drum scanner. Based on the generic information in an MTF Curve, focus is a function maximizing contrast between lights and darks."
I can certainly set the focus on my scanner to resolve the grain, and based on this article, I agree that not focusing on the grain yields an image that appears to be more in focus as a result of the smoothness of not seeing the grain in the image. I am just wondering if there's a best practice that anyone has heard about as far as whether you should focus in front of the negative or past the negative in order to achieve this point of focus that isn't directly on the grain. From everything I've read, it just always about focusing the negative, and I don't have a solid understanding of the physics behind the way either option works when scanning.
Any help or insight would be much appreciated!
I'm currently in the process of learning the best way to scan black and white negatives, and this same question generally nags me each time I get back into scanning--should I focus slightly in front or behind the negative?
I have a Minolta Scan Elite 5400ii, which has the option of manual focus, moving the negative carrier closer and farther away from the CCD. The whole issue of how to focus on a negative came up for me when I read this article:
http://cool.conservation-us.org/coo...itale/2007-04-vitale-filmgrain_resolution.pdf
If you go to page 3, there's a whole section about the supposedly common technique of focusing on the film grain. Here's the snippet that got me thinking:
"The problems of (1) locating a well-focused region of a small piece of film in a 35 mm film frame (24 x 36 mm), (2) evaluating its degree of focus and then (3) focusing that region of the film, explains why “focusing the grain” has become a common default for determining image sharpness. Focusing on the perceived film grain is a misapplication of imaging
resources. Achieving fine detail with crisp contrast differences should be the goal of the imaging process, be it on a flatbed or drum scanner. Based on the generic information in an MTF Curve, focus is a function maximizing contrast between lights and darks."
I can certainly set the focus on my scanner to resolve the grain, and based on this article, I agree that not focusing on the grain yields an image that appears to be more in focus as a result of the smoothness of not seeing the grain in the image. I am just wondering if there's a best practice that anyone has heard about as far as whether you should focus in front of the negative or past the negative in order to achieve this point of focus that isn't directly on the grain. From everything I've read, it just always about focusing the negative, and I don't have a solid understanding of the physics behind the way either option works when scanning.
Any help or insight would be much appreciated!
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
Our own Chris Crawford here on RFF has excellent tutorials online, one or two are very good about getting your scanners really dialed in for the best workflow and results.
I have been a photographer for over 20 years and have used Nikon scanners mostly since 1999, and I still come back to his online articles.
Phil Forrest
I have been a photographer for over 20 years and have used Nikon scanners mostly since 1999, and I still come back to his online articles.
Phil Forrest
meloV8
Established
Could I have a request for you? Could you scan in color, a piece of a blank sheet of paper in a slide frame?
VaughnB
Newbie
Paper scans
Paper scans
Absolutely. I scanned a series of frames with paper in the slide holder. They are labelled with the focus setting in Vuescan. I couldn't put a period in the file name for -.07, for example, so I just labelled them like "Blankscan-007.jpg" So the period will go after the first zero. (.2 is "Blankscan02). Essentially whether the number is negative or positive is bringing the film closer or farther away from the sensor, I can't figure out which.
The way the scanner works with Vuescan, focusing more toward -1 (at the end of the range) will move the film holder more toward the left. The film holder is positioned such that the emulsion side of the film (which I believe is not the smoother side, correct me if I'm wrong!), is on the left as the film goes into the scanner perpendicularly, as opposed to having the film flat with one side on the bottom or the top, like a flatbed.
So I'm not sure if the CCD is on the left or the right... When I scan, I can see a little light to the right, but I'm not sure if that's on the same side as the CCD or actually the CCD, or what.
Just wanted to give you some insight on the way that the scanner seems like it's working, in case that helps you to determine what you're looking at in these tests.
The auto focus of the scanner gave the setting of -0.07, so the one labelled Blankscan-007.jpg.
Two caveats:
* I didn't have an empty slide holder, so I took a bad negative out of one, and didn't do the cleanest job putting the paper in. So it's not perfectly straight, and you can see where some areas are more in focus than others because of how the paper curves. If I should do it again, just let me know.
Also, the file size is pretty big on these JPEG. I made a zip file on Google that is 120MB with 7 images in it. Just let me know if I should make it smaller!
Thanks!
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1vuDIeZvbdkH5uIyropu8aQRbL3KMsZhJ/view?usp=sharing
Vaughn
Paper scans
Absolutely. I scanned a series of frames with paper in the slide holder. They are labelled with the focus setting in Vuescan. I couldn't put a period in the file name for -.07, for example, so I just labelled them like "Blankscan-007.jpg" So the period will go after the first zero. (.2 is "Blankscan02). Essentially whether the number is negative or positive is bringing the film closer or farther away from the sensor, I can't figure out which.
The way the scanner works with Vuescan, focusing more toward -1 (at the end of the range) will move the film holder more toward the left. The film holder is positioned such that the emulsion side of the film (which I believe is not the smoother side, correct me if I'm wrong!), is on the left as the film goes into the scanner perpendicularly, as opposed to having the film flat with one side on the bottom or the top, like a flatbed.
So I'm not sure if the CCD is on the left or the right... When I scan, I can see a little light to the right, but I'm not sure if that's on the same side as the CCD or actually the CCD, or what.
Just wanted to give you some insight on the way that the scanner seems like it's working, in case that helps you to determine what you're looking at in these tests.
The auto focus of the scanner gave the setting of -0.07, so the one labelled Blankscan-007.jpg.
Two caveats:
* I didn't have an empty slide holder, so I took a bad negative out of one, and didn't do the cleanest job putting the paper in. So it's not perfectly straight, and you can see where some areas are more in focus than others because of how the paper curves. If I should do it again, just let me know.
Also, the file size is pretty big on these JPEG. I made a zip file on Google that is 120MB with 7 images in it. Just let me know if I should make it smaller!
Thanks!
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1vuDIeZvbdkH5uIyropu8aQRbL3KMsZhJ/view?usp=sharing
Vaughn
VaughnB
Newbie
Thank you. It seems like there's a lot of good insight on there. Just based on looking at it really quickly, he uses a method similar to the one that I've been just starting, where you scan the black and white negative as a positive, to preserve as much of the gamut as possible--
https://www.shutterbug.com/content/b-and-w-negative-scanningbra-step-step-easy-way-quality-images
I'll definitely use that article as a learn the best way to scan.
meloV8
Established
Thank you very much, Vaughn. I asked for these scans because I wanted to check something. A few years ago I bought Minolte 5400 II and I had a lot of problems with it. In this scanner, the manufacturer used the source of LED light and this was reflected in the quality of scans. The problem mainly lies in the lack of a uniform source of light. If you dim your scans, you will see stripes along the length of the scan. My Minolta had this problem even more visible. Unfortunately, from what I know is a factory problem of these scanners: /
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/mwixcoi8bxerixd/AAACeU7pNjOpUJHlbSOkJK61a?dl=0
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/mwixcoi8bxerixd/AAACeU7pNjOpUJHlbSOkJK61a?dl=0