[alt-photo] Re: scanning negatives (negative carrier)

Mon Jan 9 18:41:48 GMT 2012

The easiest way I've found to scan 35mm pano strips is to lay the film emulsion down on my Epson scanner and put a piece of anti-newton glass on top. I made a mask from black paper to put on the right side and hold the film straight. I slide a second piece of paper against the left side to push the film straight against the right paper. Lomography makes a holder for pano strips but it's worthless if there is any short axis curl as the film will pop out of the holder. I also tried the glass 120 carrier in my Nikon 9000, but the stepper motor is limited to about 70 or 75mm. 

Johnny Brian

On Jan 9, 2012, at 12:03, Ryuji Suzuki <rs at silvergrain.org> wrote:

> Is it practical to do wet mount with curly 35mm film strips? (I'm shooting a toy camera.)
> 
> You know 35mm films like to curl up longitudinally when processed and hang dry. I want to scan them without first flattening them, so that I can get the shortest dry-to-digital turnaround time.
> 
> In that case, I thought I could probably scan un-dried wet film strips, but that's probably a bad idea. First of all, the gelatin layer is still swollen and the image may not be as sharp. Secondly drying short strips of film will be a real PITA. But I'm open to this option if there are good solutions.
> 
> --
> Ryuji Suzuki
> "Don't play what's there, play what's not there." (Miles Davis)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mark Nelson wrote:
>> I would agree with Francesco regarding wet mounting, especially with 4x5 and larger on the epson flatbed.  I have seen a lot of scans that were done without wet mounting on the Epson flatbeds and they were rife with Newton Rings.
>> 
>> Mark Nelson
>> www.PrecisionDigitalNegatives.com
>> PDNPRint Forum @ Yahoo Groups
>> www.MarkINelsonPhoto.com
>> 
>> sent from my iPhonetypeDeviceThingy
>> 
>> On Jan 9, 2012, at 10:04 AM, Francesco Fragomeni<fdfragomeni at gmail.com>  wrote:
>> 
>>> Just getting back in town and haven't had a chance to read the previous
>>> responses so excuse me if this has already been said. The best solution
>>> I've found is to simply wet mount the negatives for scanning. I was very
>>> turned off by the idea at first but having seen the results and having seen
>>> that it is no where near as messy as I thought it would be it is what I do
>>> in order to get the absolute best scans possible. I use a dedicated
>>> scanning met mount solution that is alcohol free and vaporizes as soon as
>>> the negative is removed. It leaves no residue and calls for no additional
>>> clean up. Dust is usually sucked to the edges of the negative and out of
>>> the image area, Newton rings are eliminated entirely, and the negative is
>>> held flatter then any other means. I would encourage you to give it a try.
>>> Just use the proper materials and you wont have any problems.
>>> 
>>> Best,
>>> Francesco
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 8:31 AM, Jacques Augustowski<py1hy at terra.com.br>wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Should I shoot for scanning? Why not go digital all the way? So I
>>>> have to shoot two films for the same scene , one for scanning and one
>>>> for printing.  The video mentions a miracle developer, don't worry
>>>> about temperature, don't worry about developing time! IE in the 1600s
>>>> for TRIX and get a good negative. Probably he is using PS with its
>>>> maximum capacity, not to say hours in front of his monitor trying to
>>>> correct the curves and trying to get something in the Zone III. The
>>>> maximum, expose for the low lights and develop for the high lights is
>>>> dead. All those who use the zone system will be questioning his method
>>>> of testing the developers and film.
>>>> Jacques Augustowski
>>>>            PY1HY
>>>> On Seg 09/01/12 03:54 , Don Bryant donsbryant at gmail.com sent:
>>>> Oh, and one other thing, Diafine can be used for an easy no brainer
>>>> developer for roll films. There is a blog to ref.
>>>> 
>>>> http://figitalrevolution.com/2008/03/20/processing-black-and-white-film-for-
>>>> [1]
>>>> scanning-diafine-and-tx/
>>>> Diafine works well with more than just Tri-X. Most pictorial films
>>>> play well
>>>> with Diafine. Also D-23. Sandy King wrote an article for View Camera
>>>> mag. A
>>>> awhile back discussing the merits of Diafine and D-23, if I recall
>>>> correctly.
>>>> Personally, I prefer TMAX developer though for me a 1:9 or 1:7 works
>>>> better
>>>> than the 1:4 recommended dilution. Diafine has the added benefit of a
>>>> long
>>>> working life since it is a 2 part developer.
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: alt-photo-process-list-bounces at lists.altphotolist.org [2]
>>>> [mailto:alt-photo-process-list-bounces at lists.altphotolist.org [3]] On
>>>> Behalf Of
>>>> Ryuji Suzuki
>>>> Sent: Monday, January 09, 2012 1:33 AM
>>>> To: The alternative photographic processes mailing list
>>>> Subject: [alt-photo] scanning negatives (negative carrier)
>>>> I just developed a 35mm roll for the sole purpose of scanning with
>>>> Epson
>>>> V700.
>>>> The film dried with longitudinal curl, and it is difficult to go into
>>>> the
>>>> Epson
>>>> negative carrier straight. The scans are soft near the edges of the
>>>> strips.
>>>> But
>>>> this negative was exposed in a panoramic camera with rather tight
>>>> inter-frame
>>>> spacing (almost no space to hold down without blocking the image
>>>> area).
>>>> I imagine scanning freshly dried negatives rather routinely in the
>>>> future.
>>>> Is there a decent solution for this?
>>>> Also, is there any study/report on film developers optimized for
>>>> scanning?
>>>> --
>>>> Ryuji Suzuki
>>>> "Don't play what's there, play what's not there." (Miles Davis)
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo [4]
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo [5]
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo
>>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo
>> _______________________________________________
>> Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo
> _______________________________________________
> Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo
> 