Is Betterlight Still the Standard?

[gfsymon]

If you want to know what is the best you can currently get, then it is multi-shot MF. I've worked for many years with Eyelike multi-shot backs, made by Jenoptik (Carl Zeiss Jena of old). They no longer sell to the general public, but still make backs for Sinar. A 50 megapixel, 16-shot back from Sinar will beat anything else you have. We're talking a 200 megapixel *non-interpolated* file, in pure RGGB, just like a drum scan. The software will correct uneven lighting and will make the most accurate colour currently possible. Sinar even make a dedicated motorised repro camera these days.

[Adamphotoman]

For current availability Rencay scan backs are still being made ... at many many times the price of Betterlight's - Super 8K HS. Note: I believe that they use the same Kodak sensors as the Betterlight. Betterlight has stopped manufacturing although Mike Collette still provides service.

The MF workflow can make more economical sense today especially as they have come down in price.

10 years back it was way too expensive to go with a MF solution at $50 K plus.

Betterlights require a lot of light. They are light pigs. The Northlight 900 units that I use deliver all the light that I need without too much heat and no flicker issues. UV filters protect the art. Polarizers can be fitted to the lights. The process is time consuming at 10-18 minutes a scan but I can still capture 20 similar paintings in a day. I have a handy Polarizer Alignment Card which helps with cross polarizing. A colour profile needs to be made for the crossed polarizer at it's exact same setting to tame contrast. For this an SG card is much better than the classic version which only has matte patches.
For lightweight long pieces of artwork or for imaging panoramic images I use the camera in pano mode. I pull the artwork across a long aluminum framework using the pano - adapter's motor and software interface keeping the camera and sensor stationary. Kind of a poor mans Cruze scanner.

I still get more accurate results with the Betterlight than with the iQ250 that I have finished testing. The Phase is a joy to use and I would choose it in a heartbeat if I were doing product, architecture, and lowlight shots. For artwork at a fraction of the cost I still choose the Betterlight.

[Tin Can]

I read the thread, but still don't know why you are doing this.

I do a lot of copy work of pencil and paper drawings for a very good emerging artist. He really only needs high quality small jpegs for submission online. I do my best to make it all square, color correct and he and his galleries are very happy with what I do.

But, I keep warning him not to let full resolution images loose on the Internet. His stuff looks digital, but is all one off, hand made. His market is selling his signed originals.

If you are scanning for reproduction sales, yes you need the best these other posters have described. If not, you are wasting time, money and possibly creating a copyright nightmare for the artist. I use a DSLR on an enlarger copy stand with polarized lighting. I printed one of his images so he could see what danger he was in. I have also produced two high end small sample books for him to carry with him. He and his customers love the sample books and he doesn't need to lug giant paper drawings around.

We shoot another 50 next week.

[Adamphotoman]

Randy,
I am in the business of making full sized prints. These could be printed as large as 7 foot by 12 foot, So I do need resolution. I downsize images for them for the web.

My artists that only need images for web get work generated from a D800. They get folders with raw files, full sized tiffs, card sized tiffs with colour corrected hard copies and web sized jpegs.

Even when I image with a DSLR I zigalign, I shoot a white card, I equalize, and I profile.

Grant

[Tin Can]

Hi Grant,

Now, I understand your needs better, I like to get the whole story.

Thank you!

Randy,
I am in the business of making full sized prints. These could be printed as large as 7 foot by 12 foot, So I do need resolution. I downsize images for them for the web.

My artists that only need images for web get work generated from a D800. They get folders with raw files, full sized tiffs, card sized tiffs with colour corrected hard copies and web sized jpegs.

Even when I image with a DSLR I zigalign, I shoot a white card, I equalize, and I profile.

Grant

[alan-salsman]

grant-your are close to home. What is the name of your business-web sight.pm me if necessary, I would like to see your rates and type of reproductions you are doing. thanks alan

[Adamphotoman]

Hi Alan,
www.akphotos@shaw.ca
phone me
1 250 732 2296
If you are close we can absolutely work something out, but know that my prices can vary depending upon the art. So I prefer to talk to the artist and find out a bit about the art before I put my foot in my mouth.

What I mean...An artist recently emailed me. I gave them a range of prices. Then they brought in a glass mosaic with dark shiny irregular surfaces including an iridescent element and gold leaf. Well that meant a whole lot more work than and a different approach than imaging watercolours, or pencil drawings, or an impasto -pallet knife oil painting. Although time is money I had to stick to my original figures but spend extra time. A lot of questions need to be asked...such as does the artist need the paint texture to show up or do they want it to be diminished.

Note: that even with the Betterlight I have had to stitch a number of captures together to get a giga-pixel sized file.

In the end it is all about the right piece of equipment for the application. Mike Collette inventor and owner of Betterlight recently told me that anyone can purchase equipment. He then went on to say that I had something better behind my lens. I thought he was referring to the Super 6 K HS, but he was talking about the operator.

Grant

[alan-salsman]

I sent Grant a very difficult piece of art to reproduce. many layers of color including metallic and fluorescents, plus a lot of texture created by several different methods. His reproductions were flawless and he is a stand up person to do business with. next month I will commit 7 more pieces into his very capable hands. I chose this route after months of research. At first my intention was to photograph the art with a 4x5.but I realized that would in tale a steep learning curve and I was not willing to commit the time required. After speaking with several people that reproduce art, their concusses was that the work should be done with a betterlight scan back. I am very pleased to have found a operator that knows how to get the most out of the equipment-Alan

[Adamphotoman]

Thank you Alan so much for the kind words,
I will always bring my experience, equipment and knowledge to bear on any project that you throw at me. I aspire to be world class always.
Grant

[peter ramm]

Has anyone tried the current generation of linear scanners like the Uberscan?

http://colourgenics.com/?category/Uberscan

I did a lot of "archival" scanning years ago and area detectors never could get around the dynamic range limitations imposed by lens flare, adjacent area sensor interactions, etc. I always found that spot scanners (e.g. drum) are best, followed by linear and then area. Within area scanners, there are all sorts of issues with DSLR or MF acquisition if stitching is involved. Never seen those solved completely. Here's another vote for MS tech, by the way. It was hard to give that up when I went to the Phase back.

Of course, drum mounting art work is problematic so compromises must be made. If time and convenience are not the major factors, linear scanners are probably the starting point there.

Have not worked with the latest gen Phase equipment but, unless they do something strange with masking I would think the fundamental physics still apply. You are just not going to get a 4D range out of an area device. That may not matter in most cases but the archival applications care.

Again, I have no direct experience with the latest camera vs scanner equipment and would be interested in comments from people who have made those comparisons.