Newton rings on scanned 8x10" negatives

[pkr1979]

Hi all,

I'm getting pretty desperate here... I've got an Epson V700 I'm scanning 8x10" negatives on. And whatever I do I get newton rings. I'm doing emulsion side both up and down... I've tried 2 different ANR-glass in all sorts of directions... But I'm ending up with newton rings either way. And, the wetscan tray from Epson is too small for 8x10". Did anyone succeed in getting rid of these rings with this kind of scanner? Or do I have to save up for a drum scanner? Considering the price on those that might take a while.

Cheers
Peter

[Ari]

Is it colour negative film? The Epsons have always been problematic with colour films, but I would also get Newton rings with the occasional B&W neg.
The film is never flat on Epsons and the shinier colour films add to the problem.
Have you tried wet mounting directly to the scanner bed? I never tried it, but know of some here who do that successfully.

[djdister]

Make an 8x10 negative holder out of plastic or mat board, and tape the neg to the improvised neg holder. Use the "film area guide" setting and your neg holder should fit neatly within that frame.

[Drew Wiley]

You can also try anti-Newton sprays marketed by the same outfit that make scanning fluid. Don't spray directly on the film. You spray a mist into the air beneath
a fume hood and swipe the film through the mist. It can be cleaned off afterwards (yeah, another headache).

[Alan9940]

I wet mount my 8x10 B&W negs directly on to the glass bed of my Epson 1680 Pro and I've never seen any Newton Rings after hundreds of scans. I suppose the only other way to eliminate them is to build a custom film holders as djdister suggests. A couple of possible issues I see what that idea is proper focus by the scanner and sag of the negative in the holder due to the large film area.

[mitrajoon]

I have 4x5 but simply taping negs to the glass (Epson 750) eliminated the problem for me.

[Jim Andrada]

If you use the Film Area Guide setting, they expect that the film is directly on the scanner glass.

[pkr1979]

Hi all, and thanks for the response,

My worst problems are with Portra 160, but I also get them with Ektar. I use the Film Area Guide setting and put the film directly on the scanner glass. I have considered but not yet tried wet mounting directly on the scanner bed... I worry about leaks and damaging the scanner. I might give it ago though. Alan9940, do you do any adjustments on the scanner to make sure its sealed... or anything similar... or do you just fill up the scanner bed with fluid... so to speak?

If taping the negs to the glass works with 4x5 it should also work with 8x10 I suppose... And this sounds like the least headache... I assume wetscanning also implies cleaning the negative afterwards just like when using a spray (I've never tried either)... I suppose wet scanning is convenient when it comes to dealing with dust.

Did any of you try any drum scanning? I suppose this is the only other sort of scanner that can scan 8x10"? I know its a different price range but maybe they are (I hope) about to become cheaper... I'm not so keen to spend more money on a scanner than what my camera cost.

Cheers
Peter

[djdister]

If you use the Film Area Guide setting, they expect that the film is directly on the scanner glass.

That may be the expectation, however I have gotten sharp results with the Film Area Guide setting and a 5x7 negative sitting in a home made mat board neg carrier, sitting inside the film area guide.

[Randy]

From my experience: the emulsion side of some films have a more - or stronger - matte appearance. Those films are much less prone to newton rings. The emulsion side of some films is more of a "semi gloss" appearance. Those films are more prone to newton rings.
I have read that making sure the film has had sufficient time to completely dry after processing helps. I wonder if before scanning, hit the sheet of film and the scanner glass with a hair dryer (on low) for a minute will help ensure there is very low moisture on the surfaces. May be worth a try.

[Alan9940]

I have considered but not yet tried wet mounting directly on the scanner bed... I worry about leaks and damaging the scanner. I might give it ago though. Alan9940, do you do any adjustments on the scanner to make sure its sealed... or anything similar... or do you just fill up the scanner bed with fluid... so to speak?
Peter

Peter,

Definitely DO NOT simply fill the scanner bed with fluid! You will have leaking into the scanner hardware under the glass. Since an 8x10 negative fills so much area of the bed glass, what I do is tape around the bed glass with drum mounting tape to ensure a tight seal along the edges. Then, I use only enough mounting fluid to cover the film area; practice will show you how much fluid, but it's less than you think. If you use Kami fluid, then there is no need to clean the negative after the scan; you simply remove it from the bed glass and whatever remaining fluid will evaporate very quickly.

So, to sum up the steps here is my procedure:

1. Clean negative as required. Generally, this requires only a wipe with an anti-static brush and a quick once-over with something like Dust Off. If necessary, I use PEC cleaning fluid but this is rare.

2. Dispense the correct amount of scanner fluid on to the bed glass (remember, you've got it all taped up, right?)

3. Lay negative down into the fluid. I bow it slightly and start at one end to help eliminate trapped air.

4. Dispense the correct amount of scanner fluid on to the negative.

5. Lay a sheet of Graphics Arts Film (crystal clear mylar) on to the negative using the same technique as with the negative.

6. Use a scanner wipe, swiping across the mylar, to remove air bells, ensure full coverage of fluid over the entire negative surface, and to remove excess fluid as it seeps out from under this "sandwich."

7. Scan away and enjoy no Newton Rings, minimized look of grain, and, typically, sharper scans.

I have always bought all my scanner supplies from aztek.com.

Have fun!

[pkr1979]

Brilliant! Thanks - I'm gonna give this a go :-)

[Randy]

Alan, forgive my ignorance - why do you have to apply the sheet of mylar? Why couldn't you forgo that step and just scan without it?

[K. Praslowicz]

Alan, forgive my ignorance - why do you have to apply the sheet of mylar? Why couldn't you forgo that step and just scan without it?

1) Seals in the scanning fluid that is between the negative and the scanning glass along the edges so that it doesn't start to evaporate during the scan causing the negative to pop off.
2) Acts as a protective barrier while trying to push away air bubbles without marring the film.

[Alan9940]

Randy, the post above says it all.

[mitrajoon]

I was never able to eliminate "bubbles" from the scanner fluid when wet mounting. They were worse than Newton Rings. Using the 4x5 holder worked, but it takes awhile to get the neg flat, so focusing was sometimes problematic. This is the source for the idea of simply taping the neg to the scanner glass. Which as I noted above, works for me.

http://www.kennethleegallery.com/html/scanning/index.php

[Peter De Smidt]

The main reasons for getting bubbles are two-fold:
1) Not using enough scanner fluid.
2) Not smoothly bowing the film from one edge on the glass down gradually into the fluid.

[Alan9940]

I was never able to eliminate "bubbles" from the scanner fluid when wet mounting. They were worse than Newton Rings. Using the 4x5 holder worked, but it takes awhile to get the neg flat, so focusing was sometimes problematic. This is the source for the idea of simply taping the neg to the scanner glass. Which as I noted above, works for me.

http://www.kennethleegallery.com/html/scanning/index.php

I had "bubble" issues, too, early on with wet mounting, but found that it was my technique of placing the negative down into the fluid that was causing trapped air. I got the idea for the technique I use now from watching a friend load a scanner drum. If you flex the negative, start at one end, and lay it down being careful not to rotate the film in relation to the glass you shouldn't get any significant "bubbles." What is there, if any, should be easily removed by light pressure on the mylar working from the center of the film to each edge.

[pkr1979]

Alan,

I just got loads off stuff to start wet scanning... how do you apply your drum tape at the top... where that calibration area is... or does this not matter since its transparent?

Cheers
Peter

[Peter De Smidt]

No, don't cover the calibration area! I don't use tape when wet-mounting film on a flatbed. If you use a piece of mylar 2 cm bigger than the film in every direction, it should stick to the glass just fine using the mounting fluid. That could be a problem if your film is super curly, but usually it isn't. Once you mount your film, scan. It's not a super time-sensitive situation, but don't leave the film wet-mounted for a long time. After scanning, remove the film and hang to dry.

[Alan9940]

Alan,

I just got loads off stuff to start wet scanning... how do you apply your drum tape at the top... where that calibration area is... or does this not matter since its transparent?

Cheers
Peter

Peter,

Sorry, my scanner doesn't have a calibration area; bed glass goes under a metal edge on all sides. Based on the post above, it sounds like you don't want to cover that area. I would suggest just wiping away from that area to eliminate any bubbles and remove excess fluid.

Good luck! And, let us know how it all works out for you.

[pkr1979]

Peter De Smidt, do you scan 8x10? My film is not curly, but there is not that much room left.

Alan, I'll keep you guys updated on how this turns out.

[Peter De Smidt]

Yes, I scan 8x10, but I do so with a scanner that has a larger scanning bed than an Epson.

[pkr1979]

Tried wet scanning tonight... I got lots of lines instead of Newton rings... is anyone familiar with this?

[Alan9940]

Tried wet scanning tonight... I got lots of lines instead of Newton rings... is anyone familiar with this?

Lines? Can you post a picture of what you're talking about?

[pkr1979]

Hi, I didn't save the picture, but I think it might have been because I accidentally covered the calibration area with fluid or Mylar. I'll give it another go tonight :-)

[Pere Casals]

Just go to your glass workshop and make them cut a piece of quality clear window glass, the 8x10 has to fit in it... glue 4 legs (rubber, to not damage the bed) to the glass in order film is at same height than with the EPSON holder you have. Laminated safety glass may be used...

Of course make the workshop polish the glass edges. It doesn't look very high end, but it works perfect.

[mitrajoon]

Tried wet scanning tonight... I got lots of lines instead of Newton rings... is anyone familiar with this?


Yes. This is why I now simply tape my negatives to the glass. No bubbles, no lines, no rings.

[Peter De Smidt]

Yes. This is why I now simply tape my negatives to the glass. No bubbles, no lines, no rings.

Which is great for you, but it might not work for others, depending on the humidity, type of film, ....

[Andrew O'Neill]

Just go to your glass workshop and make them cut a piece of quality clear window glass, the 8x10 has to fit in it... glue 4 legs (rubber, to not damage the bed) to the glass in order film is at same height than with the EPSON holder you have. Laminated safety glass may be used...

Of course make the workshop polish the glass edges. It doesn't look very high end, but it works perfect.

You cannot scan 8x10 negatives in film holder mode, at least I cannot on the 750V...Film Area Guide only. Elevating 8x10 negatives in film area guide mode doesn't improve resolution for me, but it has for others.

[Ari]

I'm glad not to have to futz around with a v750 and sheet film anymore; I know that isn't helpful, so...
The v750 will give NRs with colour neg film, you can't get around that.
The only solution is wet scanning, and with 8x10 film that means using scanning fluid directly on the scanner glass.
Tape off three sides of the scanner, but not the top of the scanner, which is the calibration area; taping is not necessary if the fluid is applied judiciously and carefully, and that comes with a little practice.
You can dispense with the mylar at first, but as you get more critical of wet scans, mylar should be used, if only to protect film when rolling out the bubbles.

[pkr1979]

So, finally I managed to do a wet scan without any newton rings, no bubbles and no funny lines or streaks.

Initially I taped all four corners, I applied the fluid, and put on the negative. I did not apply any more fluid, nor any mylar. I got those annoying streaks again so I took of the tape in the calibration area and cleaned that part for any fluid or residue from the tape and got a scan I'm quite happy with. This is certainly the method I'll use from now one simply because I cant be bothered to spend more time sweating over that scanner than absolutely necessary. To sum up how I'll do it:
- tape all four corners
- put film area guide
- put on fluid
- put on negative (slowly from bottom to top in a bow)
- (remove film area guide)
- remove tape at top (calibration area)
- clean calibration area with a towel or whatever
- scan

Which is pretty much how Ari suggested it. Ari - how do you deal with sheet film and scanning if you dont use the Epson? And, I'll admit, I'm not to impressed by that scanner either. And I'm not sure if Epson should market it as a scanner that's capable of scanning 8x10"... because it kind of isn't.

Also, I did learn the hard way. I ruined the negative of my favorite photo after to much cleaning with various cloths and chemicals and water (Yes, I know now I messed up but I didn't know - I am new to this and I was desperate)... One shouldn't practice with the negatives that you care most for but I was really keen to get that picture without newton rings. Sadly I'm left with a previous scan with newton rings and a ruined negative instead.

Everyone, thanks though :-)

[Pere Casals]

You cannot scan 8x10 negatives in film holder mode, at least I cannot on the 750V...Film Area Guide only. Elevating 8x10 negatives in film area guide mode doesn't improve resolution for me, but it has for others.

Yes... it is important to follow these tips http://www.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store/support/supDetail.jsp?infoType=FAQ&oid=66134&foid=130102 the Area Guide mask shows the area where film can be scanned.

I place my custom bare glass (for wet mounting) over the area guide...

I don't know if placing the film at the same height than with holders has an advantage, I should test it with the 1951 glass slide. Anyway it can be a minor improvement that is irrelevant for 8x10, as a 4k monitor can display less than 1/50 of the information a 8x10 sheet is capable to deliver.

Even it is possible that with Area Guide it is better over glass that elevated (now just speculating). This scanners have 2 lenses, one is used to scan up to 5.6" wide, then theoric resolution is 6400.dpi. The other lens covers up to 8" wide with theoric 4800 dpi. Perhaps when using the wide lens system focus is just in the exterior glass face of the bed... At the end this would be the right design: Scanner detects Area Guide pattern => film is over glass => let's place lens focus there...

I'm very satisfied with the V750, (a professional may have better options, perhaps) what I like the more is that it has little digital image enhacement processing inside the firmware/driver, so there is more freedom to adjust later in PS. Other scanners have hidden internal sharpening, adaptative contrast algorithms, color enhacement LUTs, a bit like Instagram edition software... to justify excessive prices, IMHO.

True "1951" performance of the 750 is 2800 / 2300 dpi depending on the axis, for sheets this is a lot, for 135 perhaps a dedicated 135 scanner makes some difference. What I found is that multi-exposure is a critical feature, in other scanners this comes included, with the 750 this software feature had to be purchased apart. With the 850 I use now it came for free.

[Ari]

So, finally I managed to do a wet scan without any newton rings, no bubbles and no funny lines or streaks.

Initially I taped all four corners, I applied the fluid, and put on the negative. I did not apply any more fluid, nor any mylar. I got those annoying streaks again so I took of the tape in the calibration area and cleaned that part for any fluid or residue from the tape and got a scan I'm quite happy with. This is certainly the method I'll use from now one simply because I cant be bothered to spend more time sweating over that scanner than absolutely necessary. To sum up how I'll do it:
- tape all four corners
- put film area guide
- put on fluid
- put on negative (slowly from bottom to top in a bow)
- (remove film area guide)
- remove tape at top (calibration area)
- clean calibration area with a towel or whatever
- scan

Which is pretty much how Ari suggested it. Ari - how do you deal with sheet film and scanning if you dont use the Epson? And, I'll admit, I'm not to impressed by that scanner either. And I'm not sure if Epson should market it as a scanner that's capable of scanning 8x10"... because it kind of isn't.

Also, I did learn the hard way. I ruined the negative of my favorite photo after to much cleaning with various cloths and chemicals and water (Yes, I know now I messed up but I didn't know - I am new to this and I was desperate)... One shouldn't practice with the negatives that you care most for but I was really keen to get that picture without newton rings. Sadly I'm left with a previous scan with newton rings and a ruined negative instead.

Everyone, thanks though :-)

Hi Peter,
I devised a subtle but effective method for working around the Epson...I bought a Creo scanner. :)
It sounds like you did just fine, even though your film suffered some damage.
With a little practice, the Epson can be an effective scanner when using the fluid; it's the best scanner available, dollars-per-dpi.
It's also worth getting some proper scanner wipes to keep your scanner glass clean and scratch-free. I use Photex scanner wipes with distilled water, but there are other options, see the B&H website.

[mitrajoon]

Perhaps, but it takes just a minute to try it and costs nothing.

[Alan9940]

Peter, sorry to hear of your ruined negative, but glad to hear you've got a technique for wet mounting that works for you. Now, just go make some more favorite negs! ;)

[pkr1979]

Peter, sorry to hear of your ruined negative, but glad to hear you've got a technique for wet mounting that works for you. Now, just go make some more favorite negs! ;)

Indeed B-)

[pkr1979]

Fellas! I figured I'd share this one with you guys - the negative wasn't that badly damaged... and no Newton rings: https://peterrisholm.com/2016/11/02/mother-carrying-son/ :-)
Thanks again - all of you!

[DannyTreacy]

Hi all,

I have read this thread with great interest and toady attempted my first wet scan using an Epson V850.

I followed all of the hints and tips I could find and used all of the correct materials, the scan seemed to go fine, no issues with bubbles or streaks. I thought I'd do a test on 120 neg (Kodak Portra 160), one using the film holder, one wet scanned straight onto the glass using Kami fluid and Mylar on top, the issue is that on close inspection the scan with the holder actually seems sharper. Both were scanned at the same dpi, 2400.

I also tried changing the setting 'film area guide' to 'with film holder' when wet scanning as I thought perhaps the lower res lens might be causing an issue but both versions wet scanned still produced 'less sharp' initial scans.

I'm using Epson scan software, is that right? I did install Silverfast 8 and had a go with that but I find the software very cumbersome and not at all intuitive and the resulting scan was awful when wet scanned.

Any info or advice most welcome!

[pkr1979]

Hi Danny,

I'm no expert but it might be because of the lower res lens. I dont think it would help to change the setting to 'with film holder' when scanning on the bed because I think this lens focuses higher up (to where the film would be if they were in the film holder), meaning that the negative is out of focus. You need to put the film where you say in order to make the scanner focus right.

So maybe using the sharper lens and film holder is sharper then a wet scan on the scanner bed... you could try the wet mounting kit I suppose.

I only wet scan when I scan 8x10 color negatives, if I scan BW negs I dont bother. And when I scan 120 film I use the Epson holder trying to make sure the film is flat. Simply because its less effort and I dont really see the big difference. If scan the same 8x10" color negative wet and dry I cant really tell there is much of a difference, apart from the Newton rings :-) If you scan 120 film in the holders you want get any Newton rings either :-) If I where you I wouldnt bother to wet scan.

I use the Epson software as well - simply cause its easier to use. I tried Silverfast to but found it to be waaaayyy to cumbersome to deal with.

I hope it helps a little bit :-)

Cheers
Peter

[Pere Casals]

Hi all,

I have read this thread with great interest and toady attempted my first wet scan using an Epson V850.

I followed all of the hints and tips I could find and used all of the correct materials, the scan seemed to go fine, no issues with bubbles or streaks. I thought I'd do a test on 120 neg (Kodak Portra 160), one using the film holder, one wet scanned straight onto the glass using Kami fluid and Mylar on top, the issue is that on close inspection the scan with the holder actually seems sharper. Both were scanned at the same dpi, 2400.

I also tried changing the setting 'film area guide' to 'with film holder' when wet scanning as I thought perhaps the lower res lens might be causing an issue but both versions wet scanned still produced 'less sharp' initial scans.

I'm using Epson scan software, is that right? I did install Silverfast 8 and had a go with that but I find the software very cumbersome and not at all intuitive and the resulting scan was awful when wet scanned.

Any info or advice most welcome!


Hello Danny,

Presently I also scan wth V850.


Software:

Your Silverfast 8 bundled software has a very interesting feature that EPSON soft do lack: Multi-Exposure. You have a little button at left of image area that you can activate.

Multi-Exposure is a must for negatives that have high densities, this is deep shadows with slides and highlights with negative film.

http://www.silverfast.com/highlights/multi-exposure/es.html

If you know PS well then it's good advice to avoid most other image enhancing at the scanning stage and leave sharpenning and color management for PS, etc.

Remember to scan 16bits per channel, and save it as TIFF to conserve that, edit and save it for you 16 bit. If you are to make a web posting version then convert to 8 bits/channel, resize to the final display size, but remember to set "Bicubic, ideal for reductions" (it's not the default) in the image size dialog bottom (Photoshop).



Holder vs glass:

The wider lens covers well 8" (with area guide) and it has a theoric resolution of 4800 dpi, with an optical performance (USAF 1951) well under 2000dpi, but this is a lot for 8x10". I guess this lens has the glass top in focus.


The other lens has a narrower field of view and can see 5.9" wide, this is to scan a couple of strips at the same time, focus it is placed a few mm over the glass, note that V850 holders have adjustable height in order you can place film in perfect focus, you can use a negative with fine detail to adjust it. Native resolution with this lens is 6400, true optical (1951) performance may be 2800 to 2300 depending on the axis. To obtain that resolution you need to scan higher, perhaps 4800.

Obtaining a sharp look from a sharp negative will depend mostly on your post-process. For example a portrait should use different sharpenning settings for the eyes or hair than for the rest of the face, also image reduction algorithm you select it is critical, compression... and remember that webs/browsers do nasty things when resizing. Also "structure" enhancing software (like instagram one) is useful.


A Full HD monitor/TV has only 2 megapixels, but a true 60mpix image can look not well sharp in the TV because post-process. Digital post process can be oriented to make a 2 mpix image look sharp, and this is what all digital bugs are trying to do all day long.

[DannyTreacy]

Thanks for the info Peter and Pere, lots to think about!!

[Doug Fisher]

>>the issue is that on close inspection the scan with the holder actually seems sharper. <<

The holder image could be sharper because your lens' optimal focus point and film holder height happen to match. Just like the lens for film holders, the lens for scanning off the glass can have variability too. If the lens is not focused right at the glass bed level, it will affect sharpness. The ability to use the better lens and variable height are why it is preferable to use a film holder or mounting station when possible, like with the 120 format film you tested.

Doug