Scanning with a digital camera

One more. Same details as above.

rmjgfV.jpg
 
Doug A said:
I agree that scanning color film or slides with a digital camera may not be the best solution. I can eventually get colors I like in post processing - I have and know how to use Affinity Photo, Lightroom and Photoshop - but doing so is such a PITA that it's not worth it for me. I use the Plustek 7100 for 35mm color negatives and the V700 for larger b&w or color negatives and for slides of any size.

But all of my current photography is with 35mm b&w film and scanning with the X-E2 is far and away the fastest and easiest solution for me, and it produces the best results. The BEOON mask holds the film, even Tri-X, absolutely flat and the resolution of the film grain with the X-Trans sensor and Iridient X-Transformer conversion is very very good.
Click to expand...

Hi,
I'm trying to use a Fuji X-T10 and Componon 50 2.8 with a few adapters to scan bw negatives. I've scanned a couple of rolls so far and I see two problems: worm-like artifacts at grain level (specially when the negatives are pushed and the grain is strong) and a strange circular halo in the middle of the scan. Actually I can see the halo in the back screen of the camera too. Except that, the scans are really sharp.
Have you had any of these problems?
thanks
Antonio
 
Montezuma said:
Hi,
I'm trying to use a Fuji X-T10 and Componon 50 2.8 with a few adapters to scan bw negatives. I've scanned a couple of rolls so far and I see two problems: worm-like artifacts at grain level (specially when the negatives are pushed and the grain is strong) and a strange circular halo in the middle of the scan. Actually I can see the halo in the back screen of the camera too. Except that, the scans are really sharp.
Have you had any of these problems?
thanks
Antonio
Click to expand...

#1 - "Worms" - I agree with the others that this is likely a form of interference artifact. One possible test would be to change the optical magnification so that you either have a smaller "scan" that doesn't fill the frame or an moderately enlarged section of the original image. If this doesn't "have worms" then it's proof that the issue is an interference artifact and the only cure is either the reduced magnification or a different original film that has a different grain size.

#2 - Center halo - This could be Newton's rings. If the film is in contact with a smooth glass or plastic surface Newton's rings are a likely occurrence. The other possible source is internal flare in the "adapters" you mention. Any internal surface that is not a matte black in any of the adapters, either between lens and original film or lens and sensor, can cause flare. This type of flare is often seen as a circular veiling haze over the center of the image.
 
I scanned this with my D7000. I spent a lot of time in post tweaking what I considered some tricky contrasty lighting conditions. As the expression goes, it looks good on MY monitor. Thoughts?

pJokOT.jpg
 
I've been following this thread....

I've been following this thread....

Dear Board,

...and have learned that what I don't know could probably back fill the Pacific Ocean. 😀

I have the following digital SLR's at my disposal, a Canon 1DMK3, a Canon EOS 40D, and a Nikon D300. I want to digitize old color negatives as well as new 35MM film negatives going forward.

What I don't know is:

Are any of these cameras suitable for the job?

If so, what lenses will provide me with the correct reproduction ratio?

If it helps with your answers here is what you need to know about me:

I'm thrifty, or more correctly spelled, cheap!

I know nothing about macro photography other than what I have discovered digitally by accident.

I don't mind fiddling around with things until the light goes on in my head.

With all that in mind would a dufus like me be better served with a flatbed scanner like a V550/600 or Canon 9000F? I don't want to spend more than $ 200.00 +/- on this process.

Regards,

Tim Murphy

Harrisburg, PA 🙂
 
Tim Murphy said:
I have the following digital SLR's at my disposal, a Canon 1DMK3, a Canon EOS 40D, and a Nikon D300. I want to digitize old color negatives as well as new 35MM film negatives going forward.

What I don't know is:

Are any of these cameras suitable for the job?

If so, what lenses will provide me with the correct reproduction ratio?
Click to expand...

Any of the cameras will do.

You'll need a macro lens. Manual focus 55mm Micro-Nikkor will do. Some kind of light panel. And, some kind of stand to hold things in position. Maybe a macro-focus rail.

Or give it a try with the lenses you have; work out the tonality without good resolution, then see if you want to buy a macro lens.
 
Just upgraded to Mac OSX High Sierra with the latest version of their Photos app. The app now supports curve adjustments, so I tried it on one of my recently digitized negatives and the results look really good. I had been using their old Aperture app and it was getting sluggish.


DSC01644 by Peter Jennings, on Flickr
 
Well... after processing a whole roll yesterday, I think I'll stick with Aperture. Mac Photos is a cpu hog and the app crashed at least 4 times during editing. Clearly, it's not built for intense processing chores. The end results look nice, but it's not worth the frustration. Still, I hope it keeps improving.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Rayt
Camera scanning with Leica M10M
2
Replies
35
Views
4K
Godfrey
Godfrey
A
My Leica SL2-S settings
Replies
0
Views
645
Archiver
A
J
  • Featured
  • Article Article
What exactly is a point & shoot camera? Glad you asked!The Kodak of 1888 may have been the first, and even Leica got into the act!
Replies
16
Views
588
Jason Schneider
J
L
A DIY retro digital camera project - Blog #1 Origin of an idea
Replies
0
Views
75
lxforrest
L
R
Leica Digital M (11-D) Bugs
Replies
6
Views
664
Photon42
Photon42
Back
Top Bottom