PDA

View Full Version : 8x10 Scanning DIY for Epson scanners (v700/v750/v800/v850)



Pali K
20-May-2015, 17:29
Just posting a link that might be helpful so those who scan 8x10 on Epson v700 - v850 scanners. I have two of these being machined for me and I will let you know how well it works out.

http://bendolman-photography-journal.blogspot.com/2014/09/alternative-way-to-scan-8x10-film-on.html

Pierre 2
20-May-2015, 18:46
Very interesting - Thanks for sharing !
Looking forward to your own experience with these.
Pierre

Pali K
22-May-2015, 20:43
Very interesting - Thanks for sharing !
Looking forward to your own experience with these.
Pierre

Ok the results came with an added bonus - better sharpness! So the holder is very basic as expected but the aluminum is sturdy enough to mount the negative with decent tension with tape. Below are the pictures of the simple frame and the 1200 DPI scan from a 8x10 negative that shows the added sharpness with the holder.

Holder in Epson v700
http://www.netsoft2k.com/Docs/Media/Pictures/Scans/8x10DIY/20150522_193002%20(Custom).jpg

Holder on lightbox with negative
http://www.netsoft2k.com/Docs/Media/Pictures/Scans/8x10DIY/20150522_232838%20(Custom).jpg

8x10 1200 DPI Crop Without Holder
http://www.netsoft2k.com/Docs/Media/Pictures/Scans/8x10DIY/Without-Holder-8x10-1200-Crop.jpg

8x10 1200 DPI Crop Without Holder (Increased sharpness)
http://www.netsoft2k.com/Docs/Media/Pictures/Scans/8x10DIY/With-Holder-8x10-1200-Crop.jpg

I got this for color negatives but I haven't shot any color negatives just yet (still new to 8x10). However, I do have Portra film that I will be shooting when family is in town during 4th of July. I am fairly confident that this will avoid newton rings.

Hope this helps.

Pali

Tin Can
22-May-2015, 23:55
Very interesting.

Seems many of us have various ways of finding 'good enough' to quote from another thread.

I use a different, but not better method, unnecessary to specify again, as it's in the archive here somewhere.

Thanks for sharing.

axs810
23-May-2015, 12:59
I scan my "snapshot" 8x10 negatives on my Epson 4990 scanner by placing a piece of Tru-Vue Ultra Vue glass over the negative while it's laying directly on the platen glass. Works perfect for me :) I don't find anti-newton rings and the sharpness/quality is pretty good considering the scanner.


BTW, do you have any more aluminum 8x10 negative frames? I'd buy one

Jordan
23-May-2015, 16:39
I'd buy one as well

Ari
23-May-2015, 18:19
Pali,
I like the idea very much, but what would stop me from doing this (or buying this) is that I couldn't scan a full 8x10 negative, including the black borders.
Am I correct in thinking that, or might it be possible?
I know it's nitpicking, but I'm one of those people who prints/scans 100% of every image, including borders.

axs810
23-May-2015, 18:47
Ari brings up a good point...I didn't realize the borders were being cropped off :/

Pali K
23-May-2015, 19:24
Pali,
I like the idea very much, but what would stop me from doing this (or buying this) is that I couldn't scan a full 8x10 negative, including the black borders.
Am I correct in thinking that, or might it be possible?
I know it's nitpicking, but I'm one of those people who prints/scans 100% of every image, including borders.

Ari, you're absolutely correct. The frame is cropped by the holder which sucks. The only way to avoid it would be to cut the holder to the exact size of the film and then use clear tape to mount the negative. Or you can scan the negative and then Photoshop the cropped layer on top. The align-layers tool should make the process easier.

Knowing the sharpness benefit, it will be hard for me to scan without it now. Posting another negative that I re-scanned to see if sharpness is indeed a major improvement and once again, holder is significantly sharper on my scanner.

Full Scans [Without holder on left]
http://www.netsoft2k.com/Docs/Media/Pictures/Scans/8x10DIY/Scan%20Comparison%20A.jpg

100% Zoom Resolution Comparison Unsharpned Originals [Without holder on left]
http://www.netsoft2k.com/Docs/Media/Pictures/Scans/8x10DIY/Scan%20Comparison%20B.jpg

For those who are interested in getting one, I am sure that I can make it work if there is enough interest. I would be passing it to you guys at cost but keep the following in mind. This was made at my dad's CNC shop that is his retirement business. He wouldn't mind making a few of these but his shop is one that moves slow :) and he would have to squeeze these into his schedule. I could get an idea from him on how much it would be at cost for him but I am pretty sure that it will be cheaper if we can get multiples, 10+, vs. just 2 or 3. The only cost I know so far is that he paid approx $20 on ebay for the 2 aluminum sheets.

Pali

Tin Can
23-May-2015, 20:00
I will want one.

Whatever it takes.

Thanks!

Pierre 2
23-May-2015, 20:39
Would order one as well, but not at whatever price !!!

Otherwise, a local photographer told me that he scans his Delta 100 8x10 negatives on a V750 but IN COLOR. Anybody else is doing the same ? Any recognized advantage ? (he switches back to b&w in photoshop or Light Room).

Looking forward to the availability for one of those aluminum pieces...

Thanks !

Tin Can
23-May-2015, 20:59
http://www.kenleegallery.com/html/tech/scanning.php

Sal Santamaura
23-May-2015, 21:54
From your linked journal entry:


"I sourced three sheets of aluminium with differing thicknesses ranging from 1mm, 1.5mm and 2mm so I could see which thickness gave me the optimum focus and structural strength...After quite a few test scans I decided the 1.5mm thick aluminium sheet was best which gave excellent sharp scans and was strong and stable enough for repeated use, the 1mm aluminium was too thin with the film sometimes relaxed onto the scanner glass and was not stable, the 2mm aluminium was too thick leading to a slight loss in focus and sharpness when compared to the 1.5mm film support, it was quite surprising how much a difference 0.5mm made."

Epson scanners are notorious for sample variation with respect to locating the plane of focus at different heights above their glass. While 1.5mm tested as optimum for your scanner, others' might need different thicknesses. Epson, BetterScanning and ScanScience all acknowledge this by making their smaller film holders height-adjustable.

While I would also be interested in purchasing the 8x10 mounting system you've devised, what happens if my scanner (I don't have one yet; just thinking about it) "wants" a different aluminum thickness?

Darin Boville
23-May-2015, 21:58
While I would also be interested in purchasing the 8x10 mounting system you've devised, what happens if my scanner (I don't have one yet; just thinking about it) "wants" a different aluminum thickness?

Order the thinnest one and then shim?

--Darin

axs810
24-May-2015, 01:24
I'd be interested in buying an 8x10 aluminum negative frame like this just for the convenience of knowing I'm placing the negative in the correct area so I'm spending less time repositioning the negative. It would actually make my scans go a lot quicker because I can just place a piece of Tru-Vue Ultra Vue glass on top of the negative without having to do a preview scan to see if I've aligned it correctly. (on my scanner I get the sharpest scans when I scan on the platen glass with the Tru-Vue glass on top)


I would DEFINITELY buy a "full frame" version of this...

Pierre 2
24-May-2015, 06:16
http://www.kenleegallery.com/html/tech/scanning.php


Thanks for the reminder ! What an incredible amount of useful information...

Sal Santamaura
24-May-2015, 07:26
...While I would also be interested in purchasing the 8x10 mounting system you've devised, what happens if my scanner (I don't have one yet; just thinking about it) "wants" a different aluminum thickness?


Order the thinnest one and then shim?...The thinnest one was described as structurally inadequate. Even if 1.5mm (the thinnest "viable") is ordered, what if a particular Epson scanner's optimum full-area focal plane is lower? Shimming would take the film higher, not lower, than it needs to be. "Mill" the glass? :D

Epson scanner sample variation is problematic.

Ari
24-May-2015, 08:04
Ari, you're absolutely correct. The frame is cropped by the holder which sucks. The only way to avoid it would be to cut the holder to the exact size of the film and then use clear tape to mount the negative. Or you can scan the negative and then Photoshop the cropped layer on top. The align-layers tool should make the process easier.

Knowing the sharpness benefit, it will be hard for me to scan without it now. Posting another negative that I re-scanned to see if sharpness is indeed a major improvement and once again, holder is significantly sharper on my scanner.



I'll repeat that I'm nitpicking; a sharper scan is what we all want, and the aluminum holder is doubly useful, as Eric stated, for use in quick and easy positioning of the negative on the platen.
The difference in your scans is quite noticeable.

Pali K
24-May-2015, 08:24
There seems to be enough interest to make it worth spending more time on this. My dad said that it'll roughly be around 70-80 per piece at cost if he gets them CNC milled at his shop. He also mentioned that it could be cheaper if we get these "pressed" instead but he doesn't have a sheet press.

Regarding the height, I have a few ideas to make this possibly more flexible. I think if this was machined out from a 2.5mm sheet and had a pocket for the negative that was 1.5mm deep, the holder will still be strong yet only increase the height by 1mm. You could even mount 4 plastic screws on the corners to adjust the height upto 3-4 mm which will give a range of 1-5 mm similar to the betterscanning holder.

These could also be made for 5x7.

Let me know if anyone else have any other ideas to try. We could have our own LF branded holders.

Pali

brucep
24-May-2015, 08:43
70-80 what per unit?

Assuming we aren't talking dollers / pounds or euros then I'm interested
Bruce

Pali K
24-May-2015, 08:46
Sorry, US dollars.

Tin Can
24-May-2015, 09:50
Hi Pali,

I suggest you start a Forum Poll, in a new thread, instructions are somewhere...around here.

Perhaps include how much people would pay with shipping. Shipping fragile aluminum may require special consideration.

Ask about the 'black edges' which is called 'rebate' preference.

Then the trick question, which is. At what height does your Epson 7xx or 8xx scanner scan best?
It's a trick question because it reveals 2 things. 1, Actual heights being used. 2, It means that person has already solved his or her problem and will most likely not buy yours.

Unwanted advice, here's more.

Is aluminum the best material? Which grade aluminum? Anodized?

What about liability? Sharp edges cut fingers.

What will be the machined surface smoothness 'RA' be? How about dimensional tolerances, or precise thickness. If 1/2 mm is a big deal, so are a bunch of parameters.

5X7 would be very nice. Be aware 5X7 MAY use a different higher resolution scanning lens which may have different height issues and masking codes to calibrate an Epson.

I prefer NOT including the rebate, so we can tape the film better.

Scanning rebate is imitation contact printing and can be done in Post. Thus not necessary technically.

If you cannot produce and sell for double production cost, you will lose money.

Good luck and have fun with it!

Hopefully!

:)

David Lobato
24-May-2015, 10:04
+1, I could sure use one of these frames on my V700.

vinny
24-May-2015, 10:32
Hi Pali,

I suggest you start a Forum Poll, in a new thread, instructions are somewhere...around here.

Perhaps include how much people would pay with shipping. Shipping fragile aluminum may require special consideration.

Ask about the 'black edges' which is called 'rebate' preference.

Then the trick question, which is. At what height does your Epson 7xx or 8xx scanner scan best?
It's a trick question because it reveals 2 things. 1, Actual heights being used. 2, It means that person has already solved his or her problem and will most likely not buy yours.

Unwanted advice, here's more.

Is aluminum the best material? Which grade aluminum? Anodized?

What about liability? Sharp edges cut fingers.

What will be the machined surface smoothness 'RA' be? How about dimensional tolerances, or precise thickness. If 1/2 mm is a big deal, so are a bunch of parameters.

5X7 would be very nice. Be aware 5X7 MAY use a different higher resolution scanning lens which may have different height issues and masking codes to calibrate an Epson.

I prefer NOT including the rebate, so we can tape the film better.

Scanning rebate is imitation contact printing and can be done in Post. Thus not necessary technically.

If you cannot produce and sell for double production cost, you will lose money.

Good luck and have fun with it!

Hopefully!



:)
Wow.
It's a piece of metal with a hole cut in it. Either you want one or you don't.
I made mine on my milling machine in an hour.

Tin Can
24-May-2015, 10:38
Wow.
It's a piece of metal with a hole cut in it. Either you want one or you don't.
I made mine on my milling machine in an hour.

So your labor is worthless?

Machine time is free?

Make us all one.

:)

axs810
24-May-2015, 11:21
Just tell me how much and take my money! lol... :)

Pali K
24-May-2015, 13:54
I want to keep this as simple as possible and am only going to do anything to help those who need it. Don't need to make any money from this because it is not going to be a business or anything even remotely close to it. I just think this holder can benefit some of us and for those of us who want one, I am going to try to pass this to you at cost. I can't say for sure but I would imagine a custom made holder from a machine shop would come at a ridiculous price. If anyone knows some place where we could get it made at a lower rate, please let us know because that would of course be the preference. As FYI, my dad's cost is an estimate based on labor he has to pay for the machine operator plus what it would cost to get the aluminum sheets. Don't know what else to say other than that I can understand that a simple piece like this should not cost this much but when I do the math given his setup, it adds up.

Now on to a quick update, my dad is checking with his contacts to see if he can get these sheets pressed and then mill only the necessary areas to keep the cost low. That said we are dealing with very low numbers and it will be challenging to get a better price on it than doing it in house. I am also going to see if he can have a modified version made to see if we can make it more flexible with height variations.

Not going to make any promises but I will try my best to help if you are still interested knowing this will be around 70-80 USD excluding shipping. This will ship from MD, USA so factor that in when you are thinking about it.

Pali

axs810
24-May-2015, 13:59
Netsoft2k- When it gets up and running can you place me on the waitlist? (would it be possible to get one that shows the full 8x10 image?)

Pali K
24-May-2015, 14:06
Netsoft2k- When it gets up and running can you place me on the waitlist? (would it be possible to get one that shows the full 8x10 image?)
Only if you'll help me figure out exactly how to make one for us and take some pressure off me :) Keep in mind I am just a fellow photographer who wants to help but not sure the best way to do that just yet.

Anyways, I am wondering if we should compromise slight borders on the top and bottom edge so mounting is easier? Those should be just pure black parts that can easily be added later in post.

Pali

axs810
24-May-2015, 15:03
Or just make two versions of the film guide. I'm just looking for an aluminum frame guide for scanning 8x10 so I don't have to waste time readjusting the negative on the platen glass. The plastic film guide that comes with the Epson scanners are rubbish but if there was one made out of aluminum maybe that would allow me to have a better workflow since I put a piece of glass over the negative anyways.


I wish I could help but when it comes to machining things I'm of no use :(

Eliverto
24-May-2015, 19:09
An alternative material, by Ben Horne. (08:10)

https://youtu.be/1hWtiJSMckQ

Tin Can
24-May-2015, 19:54
An alternative material, by Ben Horne. (08:10)

https://youtu.be/1hWtiJSMckQ

His very appropriate mount material is about a penny width, as he puts it. However it it is not adjustable.

My sample penny, slight worn, is 0.58" which is 1.47 mm which is 'good enough' to be 1.5 mm. So...

I use a height of 3 mm.

Solutions vary.

Pierre 2
24-May-2015, 20:32
An alternative material, by Ben Horne. (08:10)

https://youtu.be/1hWtiJSMckQ

Thanks ! What I like with the rubber material is that I believe there is then essentially no risk of scratching the scanner glass.

For the aluminum piece, 70-80 USD is too much to my taste - well worth the price but over my threshold for not doing something myself. Too bad my plasma cutter is not on a cnc. Plasma cutter, router, whatever... Once on a CNC machine, the actual cutting is a matter of seconds (but that obviously does not consider the time spent to optimize the different pieces on a big sheet, procuring the big sheet, checking the result of each sheet, paying for the CNC machine etc...) CNC plasma cutter will provide a really clean cut requiring minimal finishing (much better than what I can do with the cutter by hand).

The milling has the added advantage of enabling a recessed lip if wanted but otherwise, I would inquire into laser cutting outfit.

Simply as a potential customer expressing my desires, at that price, I would prefer to be looking at a piece of polished (to avoid scratches) stainless steel for strength.

As for the recess (which I suppose is the rebate in proper english), if is very narrow, as to allow to view practically the whole negative, one thing to consider could be 8x10 sheet film dimension variability (if there are any between batches/manufacturers). One thing I would really like with the recess is that I believe that it would prevent any light from the scanner light diffracting past the film edges... Hum.. I will wait and see what others have to say. That rebate (if that is the proper word) could then really provide an advantage but only along the very edges of the scanned negative ... And maybe some thin felt could be used under the aluminum to protect the glass...

Thanks for the thread, initiative and sharing your experience. Looking forward to further developments, and comments...

Pali K
25-May-2015, 05:42
An alternative material, by Ben Horne. (08:10)

https://youtu.be/1hWtiJSMckQ
Thanks for posting this! This sure does make things a lot simpler and gives everyone the opportunity to make one for themselves.

Chuck S.
7-Jul-2015, 01:47
Had one of these precision milled from plain steel by a local machine shop and painted matte black. Chose steel, 1st, because the shop had 1.2 mm material in stock, which would allow for shimming to greater height if necessary, and 2nd, for the ability to try magnets for film holding at some later date.

I used the dimensions on the original drawing, except for the height of the inside hole. I specified 246 mm, not 248 mm, based on my own measurements which showed that to be the proper height for the actual image area of my negatives. I shot with mostly older Fidelity and Lisco holders; perhaps the original author's negatives were different.

The frame came out flat, and did not require taping to the scanner. The slightly greater weight of steel vs. aluminum or plastic helped. And as you can see from the attached, I needed very little magic tape to stretch and attach a negative. If worried about scratching the scanner glass, one could either put a bit of tape or the original Epson film area guide under the frame . However, the frame was perfectly smooth and deburred inside and out.

My machinist was John Zug at Quicksilver Precision Tool in Florissant, Colorado, a small town west of Colorado Springs. (http://www.quicksilvertool.com/) As he says on his homepage, he specializes in custom surgical instruments and positioner fabrication. The execution was excellent++. Serious work — see the attached photos. It could've been made by Epson. I paid seventy-five dollars with painting, but John said he feels he would need to get at least ninety dollars to do them one off manually. He does have a CNC mill however, and said there could be significant savings if he could get orders for at least five at a time, which would justify programming the part for the CNC machine. Other materials are available. Shipping would be extra.

John gave me his permission to post his info, and would welcome inquiries directly from forum members.

Chuck S.
7-Jul-2015, 01:49
Frame being milled.

biedron
7-Jul-2015, 21:24
I used the dimensions on the original drawing, except for the height of the inside hole. I specified 246 mm, not 248 mm, based on my own measurements which showed that to be the proper height for the actual image area of my negatives.

I made three of these holders, the first using the dimensions given on Ben Dolmans' website. A test scan with this first one showed the image out of alignment top to bottom - far enough out of alignment so as to be basically unusable. So for the next one I altered the dimensions to make the hole for the film to be 245mm long (very close to the value suggested by Chuck). I made the top cutout (the area used for scanner calibration) the same size as shown on the website (12mm), and decreased the top bar width to 11mm (as opposed to the original 18mm).

A test scan on the second holder showed that these new dimensions would work for me so I made the final holder to the same dimensions. I would recommend making a mockup for yourself out of matboard or some other easily workable material before committing to cutting metal.

Bob

sperdynamite
10-Jul-2015, 08:39
We should make a sticky thread for 8x10 scanning with the V series. It seems there a bunch of techniques, each with pros and cons. Home made area guides, wet mounting, ANR glass overlays etc... It would be nice if you could look in one thread and get a really good idea of how to approach the subject. I am on the fence between buying a sheet of ANR glass, using it as an overlay with pennys at the edges, and copying Ben Horne's rubber overlay solution. I really would prefer to be able to get a good scan with the film edges in tact. Searching around the forum just seems less efficient... :-)

I'll work on it after I play around with a solution, if somebody doesn't beat me to it!

johnmsanderson
12-Jul-2015, 22:17
I'd be really interested in something like this to improve my 8x10 scans on my V750

sperdynamite
24-Jul-2015, 18:18
Well I found a piece of matte board that is the right thickness so I tried to cut one of these frames out using that. What a mess! It's challenging with only rulers and an exacto, also the board leaves rough edges and is difficult to perfect. I think I'm going to look for one of the rubberized pads. I was able to do a test scan and the image was sharp though, so for me that was a huge bit of motivation.

Has anybody been able to scan the film holder edges with mounting frames they've made? Ultimately that's what I'd like to do.

axs810
24-Jul-2015, 19:26
When I have time Im going to stop by this 3D print store by my house and see if they could 3D print a new 8x10 frame for the v750 series and 4990...it seems doable right?

Pierre 2
24-Jul-2015, 19:36
Had a piece of 1mm aluminum laying around so cut myself one just a bit smaller than the Epson film guide with tab and all :

Mistakes (it seems that I like to make them myself) :

1) The tab is obviously only there to help you lift out the flimsy film guide : Does not to be reproduced on a rigid frame.

2) While it fils nicely in film holders, 8x10 Ektascan BRA sheet film is actually not quite 8"x10" : It actually IS smaller. I had allowed the inner dimensions of my new guide to be slightly smaller than Epson negative guide with the idea that it would be easier to tape the negative if it was at least slightly supported by my frame : Not even close as the negative is hanging out not from the inner edges of my holders but from a width of flimsy masking tape. Following advised dimensions should be a big help but I would suggest checking the actual size of the sheet film you are using (found a noticeable difference with very old agfa 8x10 sheet I had on hand.

Now,
8x10 is really quite larger than 4x5. Would appreciate some confirmation that it is indeed possible to attach the negative to a frame with enough tension to keep its surface flat, at a thereby consistent height above the scanner's glass, like the Epson can effectively do for 4x5.

Have been doing some small experiments with 1.5mm glass as well but the results are not yet up to my expectations : It seems that I am able to improve contrast but have yet to see an actual improvement in actual focus. Still have to experiment with various spacers.

This maybe what has been referenced by a previous poster but what about using some of that "museum quality no reflections at all invisible glass" to use to support the negative to the target height ? (around 90$ at a "Michaels store" in Montreal).

Pierre

jbenedict
24-Jul-2015, 20:09
As would I. I would buy 2 if it made the number high enough for production. Spares are good.

kleinbatavia
28-Jul-2015, 13:37
Sounds like an interesting solution, I would have one too... If you're shipping to the EU that is.

sperdynamite
12-Aug-2015, 07:07
Well I finally sat down and cut myself a Ben Horne style 8x10 holder. I used the exact same one he used, which I got from the Target website for about $8 dollars (US).

First, the good news: It works! I made a scan last night that was free of newton rings and acceptably sharp for a print up to maybe 16x20, which I feel like is about the limit of the V700 anyway (esp using using lower res lens).

Now the bad news: It's still not perfect, and not super easy using an exacto. I basically cut the outside using the Epson Film Area Guide as a template. For the inside I used a failed Portra 400 negative to try and get as close to the edges as I could so I could still get a 'full sheet' scan. I was basically successful in that, but I cut a teeny-tiny bit too big, and I have to do more taping of the neg to properly fit it. Honestly, if you have a big light table that would make mounting a LOT easier. I'm thinking work with the film as much as you can with lint free gloves. I may order another $8 dollar pad to see if 2nd time is the charm. Arts and crafts were NEVER my strong suit, but what I did was 'acceptable'.

Is somebody here still trying to organize a batch order of a metal holder? A precision cut metal holder would be ideal IMO. I have no idea where to even start looking as far as a metal shops. The rubber mat thing works ok but if someone organizes an order for the original metal design COUNT ME IN. :-)

Andrew O'Neill
12-Aug-2015, 09:44
I wet mount 8x10's directly on the platen glass. Scans look pretty sharp. :)

axs810
12-Aug-2015, 11:49
I wet mount 8x10's directly on the platen glass. Scans look pretty sharp. :)

Do you mask off any areas on the scanner so you don't get mounting fluid in the scanner somehow?

johnmsanderson
16-Aug-2015, 12:14
Is this going to happen? Seems like a lot of interest.

Pali K
16-Aug-2015, 13:45
I would still be happy to arrange it through my dad but I got the feeling that price was not reasonable for everyone at around $70-$80 USD. Does anyone know another source to potentially get it cheaper? Happy to help if it's needed.

Pali

biedron
16-Aug-2015, 16:29
Having made several of these from aluminum myself, I think $70-$80 USD is reasonable.

Bob

I would still be happy to arrange it through my dad but I got the feeling that price was not reasonable for everyone at around $70-$80 USD. Does anyone know another source to potentially get it cheaper? Happy to help if it's needed.

Pali

sperdynamite
17-Aug-2015, 07:44
I'm working with a friend to have one made just now. He's in Chicago and I'm in NYC though so it's a little slow going. If he's interested in taking orders I'll report back with a forum post and a price.

nonuniform
16-Sep-2015, 13:01
Do you mask off any areas on the scanner so you don't get mounting fluid in the scanner somehow?

Yeah, eeek - wet mount on the glass sounds like recipe for a disaster.

Jordan
6-Nov-2015, 07:08
Is anyone selling one of these yet? I'd like to buy one.

Pali K
6-Nov-2015, 09:38
Jordan, There was a good bit discussion but I don't believe anyone really produced these in any quantities since most found the Ben Horne version to be more ideal and easy to do themselves. You should be able to make one out of rubber mats yourself easily.

Pali

tonyowen
6-Nov-2015, 12:41
I've just spotted this thread. Therefore, please may I ask what might be considered stupid questions?
1] why does a (positive/negative) film need to be raised above the scanner glass?
2] why and/or how was the 1.5mm determined?
3] does the same philosphy apply to 4x5 and if so what is the the raised dimension?
4] are the arguments within this thread peculiar to Epson scanners or do they apply to 'any' scanner?

regards
Tony

sperdynamite
9-Nov-2015, 07:22
I've just spotted this thread. Therefore, please may I ask what might be considered stupid questions?
1] why does a (positive/negative) film need to be raised above the scanner glass?
2] why and/or how was the 1.5mm determined?
3] does the same philosphy apply to 4x5 and if so what is the the raised dimension?
4] are the arguments within this thread peculiar to Epson scanners or do they apply to 'any' scanner?

regards
Tony

1. To eliminate newton rings.

2. It could be less! but then the material could get fragile, but the reasoning is the DOF of the scanner lens can accommodate that height. 1mm would probably work fine.

3. No, because there are already great holders for 4x5 that allow you to use the better higher resolution lens (that doesn't cover 8x10). Betterscanning makes the one I use.

4. Any scanner but the Epsons are the most common, and still made so that's the one I'm talking about.

tonyowen
10-Nov-2015, 02:13
eliminate newton rings, the DOF of the scanner lens can accommodate that height, already holders for 4x5, any scanner

Thank you

Tony

pierre506
10-Nov-2015, 03:18
142088

Laser cut 3mm aluminum plate with frosted treatment for my EPSON~
4x5
5x7
8x10

Robert Kalman
18-Feb-2016, 13:12
Had one of these precision milled from plain steel by a local machine shop and painted matte black. Chose steel, 1st, because the shop had 1.2 mm material in stock, which would allow for shimming to greater height if necessary, and 2nd, for the ability to try magnets for film holding at some later date.

I used the dimensions on the original drawing, except for the height of the inside hole. I specified 246 mm, not 248 mm, based on my own measurements which showed that to be the proper height for the actual image area of my negatives. I shot with mostly older Fidelity and Lisco holders; perhaps the original author's negatives were different.

The frame came out flat, and did not require taping to the scanner. The slightly greater weight of steel vs. aluminum or plastic helped. And as you can see from the attached, I needed very little magic tape to stretch and attach a negative. If worried about scratching the scanner glass, one could either put a bit of tape or the original Epson film area guide under the frame . However, the frame was perfectly smooth and deburred inside and out.

My machinist was John Zug at Quicksilver Precision Tool in Florissant, Colorado, a small town west of Colorado Springs. (http://www.quicksilvertool.com/) As he says on his homepage, he specializes in custom surgical instruments and positioner fabrication. The execution was excellent++. Serious work — see the attached photos. It could've been made by Epson. I paid seventy-five dollars with painting, but John said he feels he would need to get at least ninety dollars to do them one off manually. He does have a CNC mill however, and said there could be significant savings if he could get orders for at least five at a time, which would justify programming the part for the CNC machine. Other materials are available. Shipping would be extra.

John gave me his permission to post his info, and would welcome inquiries directly from forum members.

A quick acknowledgement and thanks to Chuck for suggesting his machinist, John Zug, in Colorado. Just received the holder John made for me...it's perfect, and the scans are producing discernibly better sharpness on my 8x10's. Cost $90, and works better than the piece of anti-Newton ring glass I've been using.

asf
15-Aug-2017, 07:41
Another recommendation for John Zug, excellent work on holders I had him make me for 8x10 and 5x7

I had him make mine to slightly larger opening dimensions so I could get some rebate
So far the 5x7 version is working perfectly

asf
25-Aug-2017, 18:34
Going to ask him to make me another 8x10 holder as the one I had him make crops a little too much for my uses (my fault in measuring)

asf
17-Sep-2017, 09:36
Deleted

Pere Casals
17-Sep-2017, 11:29
I scan my "snapshot" 8x10 negatives on my Epson 4990 scanner by placing a piece of Tru-Vue Ultra Vue glass over the negative while it's laying directly on the platen glass. Works perfect for me :) I don't find anti-newton rings and the sharpness/quality is pretty good considering the scanner.


BTW, do you have any more aluminum 8x10 negative frames? I'd buy one

I guess that this is also a good way, probably the Low Res lens (used beyond 5.9 scan width, with area guide) is focused on the bed plane...

Moogie
1-Oct-2018, 23:30
Dear forum friends,

Anybody has the perfect inner dimensions for 8x10 and 5x7 holders?
As I have the Epson plastic version which is generally useless regarding the newton ring issue, I also like to try the pet mat version using the Epson for the outside dimensions.

Thanks and best regards, Miguel

Pere Casals
2-Oct-2018, 01:46
Dear forum friends,

Anybody has the perfect inner dimensions for 8x10 and 5x7 holders?
As I have the Epson plastic version which is generally useless regarding the newton ring issue, I also like to try the pet mat version using the Epson for the outside dimensions.

Thanks and best regards, Miguel

https://www.jbhphoto.com/blog/2011/01/29/film-diagonal/
182926


If you place the emulsion side facing to the glass then you'll mostly avoid the rings.

You can also wet mount the sheet directly on the bed glass.

Moogie
2-Oct-2018, 10:10
https://www.jbhphoto.com/blog/2011/01/29/film-diagonal/
182926


If you place the emulsion side facing to the glass then you'll mostly avoid the rings.

You can also wet mount the sheet directly on the bed glass.

Thanks a lot Pere, I will try your suggestions. Also for the wet mount scan I will search the forum to find some suggestions.

Miguel

Pere Casals
2-Oct-2018, 11:01
wet mount

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zg6uO2ODvbY

Also get a cheap HEPA air purifier (I use a Honeywell 16000), with it you will get rid of dust by starting it 5 minutes before (if room is small).

Moogie
2-Oct-2018, 20:18
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zg6uO2ODvbY

Also get a cheap HEPA air purifier (I use a Honeywell 16000), with it you will get rid of dust by starting it 5 minutes before (if room is small).

Ah, that's a cool advice as well. I even have one at home but never used it for this purpose :-)
And the video explains everything clearly.
Thanks a lot, Pere!

prohtex
10-Oct-2018, 02:09
Does anyone have experience scanning 8x10 film on a 10000XL? I have a 12000XL (same specs as the 10k I believe) and am trying to find a source for a custom holder that will keep the film flush with the bed. Ideally there would be ANR glass involved.

1erCru
30-Oct-2018, 14:33
Didn’t want to start a new thread. Was looking into getting an 8x10 back for my Sinar and was looking for an analysis / opinion on what the scan quality leap was moving from 4x5 to 8x10 while using an Epson v750-850.

I’m finding 4x5 to give very good prints up to around 16x20. It always pained me to know I could get to more detail / sharpness / tonality if I had access to a drum scanner. I’ve read 8x10 scans off an Epson can be excellent due to the size of
the negative. There is certainly a giant leap moving from 35mm to 120mm and then again to 4x5. The results do get better and better. Is this also true moving to 8x10?

Thanks

Pere Casals
30-Oct-2018, 15:18
Expect to have the same quality with a 75% larger print

For 8x10 the epson uses the lower res lens, so you cannot increase 100% the print size while conserving the same scan quality

1erCru
30-Oct-2018, 16:00
So even after downsampling there wouldn’t be enhancement to tonality or sharpness?

If true , this is still good to know.

Ken Lee
30-Oct-2018, 16:21
The results do get better and better. Is this also true moving to 8x10?

There are other factors to consider when evaluating a larger film format like 8x10.

For equivalent angle of view from the same distance we need longer lenses which are generally lower in resolution. Longer lenses require smaller apertures to give equivalent depth of field. For example, given the identical subject-to-camera distance, a 150mm lens at f/22 has the same depth of field as a 300mm lens at f/45 or a 600mm lens at f/90.

At smaller apertures we need either brighter light or longer exposures which may not be suitable for all subjects.

For these and other reasons, when we go from 4x5 to 8x10 we don't simply double the resolution as we double the width of the film (or quadruple it as we quadruple the area).

Even so, we get a lot of resolution (http://www.kennethleegallery.com/html/tech/8x10Detail.php).

Pere Casals
30-Oct-2018, 17:26
So even after downsampling there wouldn’t be enhancement to tonality or sharpness?

If true , this is still good to know.

35mm film has the same tonality than 8x10 if same development

4x5 image quality is insane, 8x10 is an overkill for most applications

But some 8x10 shots have a particular look from the defocus roll off, I'm addicted to that, IMHO the way depth is worked in 8x10 is so amazing,

don't make the mistake to look throught a 8x10 ground glass (Jim). It's addictive...

1erCru
30-Oct-2018, 18:31
Yeah. I can see that. That photo is telling. I couldn’t crop in like that with my 4x5 scans.

Steven Ruttenberg
31-Oct-2018, 19:02
How does this compare to wet scanning? I would place optical mylar over the 8x10 directly wet mounted to scan glass. Or you could use anr glass on top of negative as part of the wet scan mounting.

I didn't look bit how far above the glass is the negative placed with the holder? Do you use the bar comes with scanner to invoke the lens for the 8x10 negative? My understandingbos that lens will cover full 8x10 and is focused at the scanner glass so mounting above could be an issue. Just inquiring.

I tried the link but wasn't granted access.

Pere Casals
1-Nov-2018, 03:42
Steven, you can wet mount the 8x10 negative on the bed glass. This would be useful for an scratched negative. Other benefits are scarce, but this is 'à chacun son goût.

A common issue when dry scanning on bed can be newton rings, but if the emulsion is facing to the glass we may not have to wet mount it. Another reason to wet mount on bed, in some cases, is ensuring perfect flatness (a rare curled sheet?)

Wet mounting the negative won't damage the bed glass if taking some care, but in any case a replacement for the bed glass is quite cheap.

Tin Can
1-Nov-2018, 06:34
If wet mounting can erase a scratch doesn't that imply an overall softening of a negative?

Less sharp?




Steven, you can wet mount the 8x10 negative on the bed glass. This would be useful for an scratched negative. Other benefits are scarce, but this is 'à chacun son goût.

A common issue when dry scanning on bed can be newton rings, but if the emulsion is facing to the glass we may not have to wet mount it. Another reason to wet mount on bed, in some cases, is ensuring perfect flatness (a rare curled sheet?)

Wet mounting the negative won't damage the bed glass if taking some care, but in any case a replacement for the bed glass is quite cheap.

Pere Casals
1-Nov-2018, 13:42
If wet mounting can erase a scratch doesn't that imply an overall softening of a negative?

Less sharp?

Rany, no softening... because mounting fluid has similar refraction index than film it avoids the effect of the scratch without adding blur.

Wet scans are equal or better than the dry ones, equal at least. If the film was curled then it can be clear benefit as flatness is ensured.

183958

Steven Ruttenberg
1-Nov-2018, 13:55
I find that when I wet mount my 4x5, I get much better scans, more even tones and colors and believe it or not they are crisper. I did quite a bit of dry scanning being somewhat apprehensive about wet scanning before trying wet scanning. Once I did, it was a no brainer to continue and forget dry scanning all together. For the Epson, you have to use the tape you get from distributor for Kami scan fluid and tape the scan glass edges to prevent the fluid from getting into the scanner. From there once wet mounted to the scan glass, I would lay the slightly oversized 8x10 ANR glass from better scanning on top of this. Seems to be good.

I short, I doubt I will ever dry scan a negative again, even medium or 35mm format.

koraks
1-Nov-2018, 14:11
It's four times as much dots as 4x5. Not more, not less. If you can go up to 16x20 to your satisfaction with 4x5, you can expect to pull off 32x40 or a little less with 8x10. Of course costs of film increase quite rapidly as well but so does bulk. If you shoot 8x10, you come to view 4x5 as nimble and portable...

Tin Can
1-Nov-2018, 15:52
I dry scan everything even sections of 11X14, if it's curled I lay AN 8X10 on top.

But that's just for yucks.

I don't use the now digital file for printing. I contact print or enlarge. Far more fun and still magic when something develops.

I use a DSLR when I want digital printing and I have a pro print that.

All roads lead to the 'Icon'!

Steven Ruttenberg
1-Nov-2018, 19:23
I dry scan everything even sections of 11X14, if it's curled I lay AN 8X10 on top.

But that's just for yucks.

I don't use the now digital file for printing. I contact print or enlarge. Far more fun and still magic when something develops.

I use a DSLR when I want digital printing and I have a pro print that.

All roads lead to the 'Icon'!

Nice

massimodec
20-Nov-2018, 06:08
I need a home scanner in pretty good quality, for 4x5 and 8x10 negatives, and I'm asking for some advice from your experiences.
V800 or v850 seem universally known as pretty good.
But I did not find specifications on tech differences between the two, even in this specific thread...

I would like to "reach the grain", avoiding "interpretations" by scanner softwares or by any other trick.
Actually, a good example I've seen here is this one, coming from a 4990 one:
http://www.kennethleegallery.com/html/tech/8x10Detail.php ;)

Do you have any clue?
Thank everybody

Pere Casals
20-Nov-2018, 07:13
V800 or v850 seem universally known as pretty good.


Sadly there are no many alternatives, tell me another 8x10 able scanner you can buy new with warranty, etc

Alternatives are old Pro gear with potential troubles with service and drivers for new computers.



V800 or v850
tech differences


The single physical difference is that V850 internal lenses are coated, but this is hard to be noticed in most situations.

The difference is in the bundled Silverfast software version, "SE PLus" vs "SE". The V800 version does not include Multi-Exposure feature that enhances performance for high velvia densities from 3.11D to 3.38D, Silverfast says. If you have a V800 you can purchase that ME feature separately later, https://www.silverfast.com/highlights/multi-exposure/en.html



I would like to "reach the grain", avoiding "interpretations" by scanner softwares or by any other trick.


To really "reach well" the grain with sheets you need a drum scanner, some flatbeds like Cezanne are able to scan strips of the sheet at high res that you have to join in Photoshop to get the full image, if not stitching in Ps then the EPSON is a very good choice sporting some 2400dpi effective (from 6400 hardware) when scanning width is under 5.9" (4x5 and 5x7 sheets),

For 8x10 the EPSON uses another lens that covers 8" width (rather than 5.9") delivering around 2000 dpi effective. For 8x10 the sheet is placed on the bed with emulsion down to avoid newton rings, you may even wet mount the sheet on the scanner glass bed.

____

With 4x5 a V800 perfroms better than a 4990, for 8x10" both perform similar, main difference is that the 4990 has a single lens covering 8", while the V800/850 has one lens covering 8" and another one covering only until 5.9". The 5.9" coverage lens is used with film holders, if instead using a holder you use the 8x10 "area guide" then the scanner detects it and uses the lower res lens covering more.

Another thing is that the epsons deliver a less digitally optimized image, Pro scanners usually have inside dedicated smart processing to optimize the images, with an epson you always have an additional job in Ps to refine the image result.

massimodec
20-Nov-2018, 07:38
Thank you Pere Casals!
You are right: there are no alternatives on new machines, but now I know differences...

Yes: in case of exhibitions and collection prints series I would go to a lab for a drum scanning at highest level: here in Italy there are some well known internationally.
But to have a good scan for "close" purposes and to analyze images and possibilities the 850 could be good enough... at least I hope.
Thank you again

Tin Can
20-Nov-2018, 07:49
None of the Epson have 5X7 dedicated film holders. I use the OE 8X10 matte outline for 5X7.

The 800 series is vastly improved over 700 with LED illumination which need no warmup.

I use a 700 and do not see a need to upgrade yet. I will wait for the 900/1000 series as mine works great.

Steven Ruttenberg
20-Nov-2018, 16:40
I use an V850 with excellent results. Will do anything up to 8x10.

afxstudio
12-Dec-2018, 02:53
Yes: in case of exhibitions and collection prints series I would go to a lab for a drum scanning at highest level: here in Italy there are some well known internationally.


I'm in Italy too, but I don't know any lab that does drum scans on request. Well actually I just found one in Firenze but it's way too far from where I'm located (Milan hinterland).
May I know which ones you refer about?

On a side note for everyone: I'm looking for a new scanner too, with a 4x5 sheet and a V800, what final image resolution I can expect with the best/highest settings? Thanks.

massimodec
13-Dec-2018, 08:39
I'm in Italy too, but I don't know any lab that does drum scans on request. Well actually I just found one in Firenze but it's way too far from where I'm located (Milan hinterland).
May I know which ones you refer about?


I know that Massimo Vitali prints near Como, at one of the best printing studios/labs in the planet... but I don't remember the name

massimodec
13-Dec-2018, 16:03
perhaps you are thinking of:

scan: http://castorscan.com <— milan

print: https://grieger.com/en/international-fine-art/art-photographers/ <— in germany


jen

RIGHT ! That's it ! Castor !

afxstudio
7-Jan-2019, 13:01
I know that Massimo Vitali prints near Como, at one of the best printing studios/labs in the planet... but I don't remember the name

Sorry for the late reply, thank you massimodec.

chubbco1550
22-Sep-2019, 07:08
Just joined the LFP Forum. Can you point me to a thread that helps me understand how to get full-frame 8x10 scans from my (ca. 1975) 8x10 b/w film negatives on an Epson v850?

Tin Can
22-Sep-2019, 07:26
http://www.kennethleegallery.com/html/scanning/index.php

Pere Casals
22-Sep-2019, 09:09
Just joined the LFP Forum. Can you point me to a thread that helps me understand how to get full-frame 8x10 scans from my (ca. 1975) 8x10 b/w film negatives on an Epson v850?

You should place the Area Guide accessory in the right position on the glass bed:

195735

In this way the scanner knows that it has to use the low resolution lens inside, as the hi res lens ony covers 5.9".

Then place the negative directly on the glass with the emulsion side down, touching the glass, as the low lens is focused just in the outer glass surface.

For the rest it's like scanning any other film: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-z8drKsf-ic

You can adjust how the image looks in the Epson Scan scanning software, but I prefer to take all dynamic range and later editing in Ps.

If you take all the histogram then the image may look dull, so you may need to compress shadows and highlights in Ps to allow range enough for the mids.

Scan BW negative mode, 16 bits per channel and save in TIFF format because if not your image can be converted automatically to 8 bits per channel. After edition you may convert it to 8bits and jpeg, but better don't degradate quality until the last moment.

Probably 2800dpi will be enough, but you may scan several crops at different dpi to see when a higher dpi is not interesting for you. At 2800dpi-16bits you get a 1.25Gb file...

Feel free to ask anything (by PM, if you want) if you have any problem or question.

The link in the previous post is well worth.

Doug Fisher
22-Sep-2019, 09:38
[QUOTE=Pere Casals;1518112]You should place the Area Guide accessory in the right position on the glass bed:

195735

FYI, the 800/850 probably has the newer design which is just a top piece that fits at the top of the bed (for calibration) as opposed to the v700/v750-style piece above that is the rectangle the size of the scanner bed.

Doug

Pere Casals
22-Sep-2019, 09:49
FYI, the 800/850 probably has the newer design

Yes... this one:

195736

Epson manual (https://files.support.epson.com/docid/cpd4/cpd41530.pdf) pages 33-34 tells how to place it.

Tin Can
22-Sep-2019, 10:08
Pere, reading the 850 manual from your link led me to the idea that the 850 wet mount kit is usable on a V700.

And available for under $60. https://www.amazon.com/Epson-Fluid-Mount-Accessory-V800/dp/B00OKB52JE

I have never read anywhere BEFORE that we can do that!

Looks very good for 5X7 and smaller.




Yes... this one:

195736

Epson manual (https://files.support.epson.com/docid/cpd4/cpd41530.pdf) pages 33-34 tells how to place it.

Pere Casals
22-Sep-2019, 12:46
wet mount kit is usable on a V700.

Randy, for 8x10" we also can wet mount directly on the scanner glass bed. If at some point the glass becomes scratched then a replacement is cheap.

The V700 is virtually identical to the V850, main difference is the more convenient LED illumination, and the fact that the V750 and V850 have a better coating in the lenses that probably are very difficult to notice.