Imacon 343

[Bill McKinley]

In past scanner threads in this forum some users have suggested that the Imacon FT343 (medium format scanner) can be used on 4x5 sheet film. i.e. by scanning the sheet in 'sections' and pasting in Photoshop.

My question is whether the scan path of the 343 is big enough to scan 4x5 without cutting up the film. None of the references I have been able to find are clear in this.

I did call the local scanner dealer (Glazers in Seattle) and was told that the 343 scan path will not accomodate 4x5 sheets and I suppose he knows what he's talking about. Can any of the cognoscenti here second him on that?

Are there any ANY medium format scanners which could accomodate 4x5 film?

Thanks,

Wm T.

[Walt Calahan]

http://www.imacon.dk/

Flextight 646

Flextight 848

both handle film to 12 cm wide

[David Luttmann]

Just order the 6x12 holder and scan the 4x5 in 2 seperate passes. You can then put the images together in Photoshop or another package like Panavue.

I haven't done it myself with my 343. I normally have my 4x5 scanned on a collegues Imacon.

[George Stewart]

You can absolutely scan 4x5 on the Imacon 343- I have. Further more, I've scanned 4x5 Polaroid Type 55 (with the rough edges) and 4x10 on the 343. One does not have to cut or chop the film to do so. For conventional 4x5, the 6x12 film holder is used to scan slightly more than half the film. For the next scan, just shift the film over to do the other side. Part of the film does stick out from under the magnet, but not beyond the edge of the holder. When scanning 4x5, the magnetic wheel that guides the holder into the scanner does ride on top of the film itself, but without any scratching that I've noticed. For larger films like Type 55 and 4x10 I used the 6x17 holder.

If you are doing mostly, and many 4x5 scans, I'd recommend a scanner that will do 4x5 without the stitching-it's alot of work. If one does mostly MF and smaller with some 4x5 scans, once in a while, I highly recommend the Imacon 343.

[Bill McKinley]

Thanks all for the feedback.

Looks like I will have to chide the Glazer camera tech for his misinformation.

[Jon_1891]

>Looks like I will have to chide the Glazer camera tech for his misinformation.

>--Bill McKinley 2005-12-20 15:43 PST

Think again. He wasn't misinforming you at all. The scanner isn't designed for 4x5. Yes, it will do it. Say he suggests you do the method above, and the edge of your irreplaceable neg gets trashed... you will go to the store screaming about real 'misinformation'.

[Larry Kellogg]

>Looks like I will have to chide the Glazer camera tech for his misinformation.

>--Bill McKinley 2005-12-20 15:43 PST

Think again. He wasn't misinforming you at all. The scanner isn't designed for 4x5. Yes, it will do it. Say he suggests you do the method above, and the edge of your irreplaceable neg gets trashed... you will go to the store screaming about real 'misinformation'.

I bought the Imacon 343 back when I thought I would never go beyond medium format and I have just started with large format. ;-) Can someone recommend something I could put under the film to avoid trashing the negative if I try to scan in two passes, as has been suggested. I guess the material would have to be very thin and protective.

Larry

[Larry Kellogg]

You can absolutely scan 4x5 on the Imacon 343- I have. Further more, I've scanned 4x5 Polaroid Type 55 (with the rough edges) and 4x10 on the 343. One does not have to cut or chop the film to do so. For conventional 4x5, the 6x12 film holder is used to scan slightly more than half the film. For the next scan, just shift the film over to do the other side. Part of the film does stick out from under the magnet, but not beyond the edge of the holder. When scanning 4x5, the magnetic wheel that guides the holder into the scanner does ride on top of the film itself, but without any scratching that I've noticed. For larger films like Type 55 and 4x10 I used the 6x17 holder.

If you are doing mostly, and many 4x5 scans, I'd recommend a scanner that will do 4x5 without the stitching-it's alot of work. If one does mostly MF and smaller with some 4x5 scans, once in a while, I highly recommend the Imacon 343.

George,
Which stitching software were you using to do the 4x5 work? How were the results? I really don't have the space for a flatbed scanner and bought the 343 because of its tiny footprint. I want to be able to get away with scanning 4x5 on it. I'm not sure anyone ever answered the question as to whether the optical path would support 4x5. If you took the 6x12 and cut it for 4x5, would it work?

Larry

[George Stewart]

Larry,

The optical path of the 343 does not support larger that a 56mm (MF) width. So, do not cut any film holders for scanning LF films. Just use the 6x12 holder and shift the film between scans. I use Photoshop to assemble my scans. Notes: Since my original posts I have acquired a Creo IQSmart 2 and do all my LF scans on that. Also, I did have a custom holder made, by Imacon (now Hasselblad), for scanning 35mm negatives - I wanted to show the sprockets and unexposed edges of film for artistic purposes and since the aperture of the holder was still smaller than MF it was not a problem.

[Larry Kellogg]

Larry,

The optical path of the 343 does not support larger that a 56mm (MF) width. So, do not cut any film holders for scanning LF films. Just use the 6x12 holder and shift the film between scans. I use Photoshop to assemble my scans. Notes: Since my original posts I have acquired a Creo IQSmart 2 and do all my LF scans on that. Also, I did have a custom holder made, by Imacon (now Hasselblad), for scanning 35mm negatives - I wanted to show the sprockets and unexposed edges of film for artistic purposes and since the aperture of the holder was still smaller than MF it was not a problem.

George,
Thanks for taking the time to reply to this old thread. So, in your opinion, is the threat of scratching my negative overrated? The negative will be on top of the metal plate when it is scanned in this way, which is why I'm wondering if some kind of tissues paper could be put down to protect the negative. What do you think?

That Creo looks like a nice rig, but not cheap by any means. I would like to get away with using the 343 if at all possible. Were the stitched results perfect?

I'm curious as to how your custom 35mm holder is holding onto the film, If the film is slightly misaligned, sometimes I get part of the sprocket holes and like the effect, but your holder must be holding onto very little of the edge of the film to give you more of the holes. How much bigger did they make the opening?

Larry