trog
f/stop!
It's a wet-grey Canada day. No better time to spend some quality time with my photo hobby.
I use both a Nikon CS 8000ED and an Epson V750 for my scans. The Epson is reserved for my 4x5 stock, where the Nikon (c/w 120- glass film holder) is my workhorse for 120 and 35mm. In an effort optimise my Epson flat bed scans; I've been experimenting with various film holders. I'm currently working with the BetterScanning.com variable height film holder, coupled with a DIY mask I fabricated from 18-gauge 304 Stainless Steel.
I usually scan 4x5 stock for large print formats (44" x 60"). With the Eposn scanner setting cranked up to 4800DPI and Multiple-Scan turned ON, scans can take up to 2-hours. Over that time, I found that the adhesive tape holding the film on the B/S glass would fail and the film would separate and sag onto the scanner glass resulting in only half an in-focus image.
The steel mask I fabricated allows me to mount the film on top, which I then sandwich with a piece of AN glass. I can both wet and dry mount using this approach. The film is maintained flat, and there's no tape required. Results to date have been pretty good, but there's still room for improvement.
The Nikon 8000ED specs are considerably better than the Epson. However out of curiosity, I wanted to see how they compared. Below you'll find a couple of test-patterns comparing the two scanners. I use Nikon SCAN on the ED8000 and Silverfast 8 on the Epson.
The first image is the Nikon set at 4000DPI, the second is the Epson at 4800DPI.
I use both a Nikon CS 8000ED and an Epson V750 for my scans. The Epson is reserved for my 4x5 stock, where the Nikon (c/w 120- glass film holder) is my workhorse for 120 and 35mm. In an effort optimise my Epson flat bed scans; I've been experimenting with various film holders. I'm currently working with the BetterScanning.com variable height film holder, coupled with a DIY mask I fabricated from 18-gauge 304 Stainless Steel.
I usually scan 4x5 stock for large print formats (44" x 60"). With the Eposn scanner setting cranked up to 4800DPI and Multiple-Scan turned ON, scans can take up to 2-hours. Over that time, I found that the adhesive tape holding the film on the B/S glass would fail and the film would separate and sag onto the scanner glass resulting in only half an in-focus image.
The steel mask I fabricated allows me to mount the film on top, which I then sandwich with a piece of AN glass. I can both wet and dry mount using this approach. The film is maintained flat, and there's no tape required. Results to date have been pretty good, but there's still room for improvement.
The Nikon 8000ED specs are considerably better than the Epson. However out of curiosity, I wanted to see how they compared. Below you'll find a couple of test-patterns comparing the two scanners. I use Nikon SCAN on the ED8000 and Silverfast 8 on the Epson.
The first image is the Nikon set at 4000DPI, the second is the Epson at 4800DPI.
Attachments
Pete B
Well-known
Thanks for posting this. More and more I'm becoming frustrated with my V700 for resolution. I'm hoping there'll be a night and day difference comparing the V700 the new Plustek 120.
Pete
Pete
Aristophanes
Well-known
Resolution or focus on the Epson. Looking to see what Plustek comes out with and the 120.
Pete B
Well-known
I've got the focus as good as I can. I'd like to see some of this grain that people talk about 
Pete
Pete
billkoe
Newbie
Hey Pete... Here's a section of Tri-x at 100% scanned to 5500 pixels on a full-frame 35mm negative using my v750 (dry) and standard holder. That's film grain. The full image can be seen here. I find that the key to getting sharp scans from the v750 is VERY careful film loading so that focus is not an issue. Also for my scanner I scan the film emulsion side down contrary to Epson's suggestion. I use Silverfast Ai.
Though I like the scans I get from my Epson, I'm eagerly awaiting the new Plustek to see what the realities are...
Bill
Though I like the scans I get from my Epson, I'm eagerly awaiting the new Plustek to see what the realities are...
Bill
Pete B
Well-known
That's certainly impressive.
Pete
Pete
35photo
Well-known
Hey Pete... Here's a section of Tri-x at 100% scanned to 5500 pixels on a full-frame 35mm negative using my v750 (dry) and standard holder. That's film grain. The full image can be seen here. I find that the key to getting sharp scans from the v750 is VERY careful film loading so that focus is not an issue. Also for my scanner I scan the film emulsion side down contrary to Epson's suggestion. I use Silverfast Ai.
Though I like the scans I get from my Epson, I'm eagerly awaiting the new Plustek to see what the realities are...
Bill
I'm soo jealous you got to photograph Muddy Waters! Wow, what an experience that must have been....I got to see and meet Pinetop and Willie Big Eyes Smith before they both past away...will never forget it.. Thanks for the images....
Marko
mikestacey
Newbie
You can use the Nikon ED8000 to scan 4x5s. Just do 4 scans with the glass holder then stitch. Requires cutting off the clear edge of the film but the results are superb. 48 x 60" files @ 300dpi.
V-12
Well-known
A great set of pictures Bill.
Your 'film grain' comment reminds me of what I considered to be a problem with my Minolta Multi Pro. It would make incredibly sharp scans, but they would be of what looked like on close inspection a thin layer of grain. But film emulsion is not 'one layered' and the grain can be hard or soft, big or small and any combination. Scans from the same negative with my V700 show film grain and its characteristics, not digital snow. So I prefer the tradeoff of less resolution for the time being (until the Plustek is tested), although I limit myself to MF.
billkoe
Newbie
Thanks for your comments, V-12. I only ask of my scanner what I required of my enlarging lenses from my darkroom days. I wanted sharp focus across the frame. A good scanner/enlarger will reveal what is on the emulsion as well as in it. In the case of black & white film that will be grain.
Fine or course, grain is the "stuff" of a film image. It's partly what drew me to the medium 40 years ago. It was eye opening to see what comprised the image sort of like discovering Seurat's pointillist "Sunday Afternoon on the Island of La Grande Jatte" at the Art Institute in Chicago.
I mostly shoot digitally now and think of it a bit differently capturing the image without the interpretation of film.
Fine or course, grain is the "stuff" of a film image. It's partly what drew me to the medium 40 years ago. It was eye opening to see what comprised the image sort of like discovering Seurat's pointillist "Sunday Afternoon on the Island of La Grande Jatte" at the Art Institute in Chicago.
I mostly shoot digitally now and think of it a bit differently capturing the image without the interpretation of film.