Epson V700 Issue

[Keith S. Walklet]

Here you go Rakesh...

This is a small piece of sky with some Newton rings, which appears as concentric multi-colored rings much like a topo map.

[Rakesh Malik]

Thanks, Keith!

That's not much different from what I'm seeing. It's mostly visible in my scans where there's an edge with some color in it, like along the edge of a flower petal.

So now to figure out the best way to get rid of those.

[Keith S. Walklet]

Wet mount!

The rings happen when the film comes in contact with the glass of the scanner bed. The problem with the stock holders is that they don't keep the film flat, so it often bulges and comes in contact with the glass. Not to mention that the plane of focus for a lumpy piece of film is all over the place.

Wet mounting makes those rings (and scratches) disappear. If you need additional motivation, imagine a 1950s TV commercial with tinny music and particularly cheery woman stating the same. ;-)

[Rakesh Malik]

Thanks for the advice!

I guess I'll be trying the wet mount approach next

[Jon Middleton]

Here's what I've learned lately. I scanned some 120 Provia 100 using the standard film holders. Painful and poor quality due to the bowing of the film. They improved with fluid mounting. I also tried scanning a small area of a 4x5 transparency, and it wasn't a great deal better than using the stock holder.

I used the following setup, which replicates the betterscanning holder. I fluid mounted the film on glass with mineral oil, taped acetate over the top, then placed the glass, film side down, on spacers I cut with my table saw. I tried .125" (3.18mm), .140" (3.5mm) and .162" (~4mm). The sharpest, by a small margin over the .140", was the .125". The .162", or 4mm, was noticeably softer.

So, I rescanned with the .125" spacers, at many different resolutions- 1200dpi, 1757dpi (random choice to see if it would work. It did.), 2400dpi, 3200dpi, 4800dpi, and 6400dpi. I couldn't see much improvement above 2400dpi.

Conclusions-

1) 120 mm should be fluid mounted for critical scanning. For just judging composition, etc, the standard film holders are okay. Not Epson's fault, you need to clamp all four sides of a frame to hold it well enough to get a decent scan. Scanning 120 strips won't work with the stock film holders.

2) 4x5 can be scanned at 2400dpi with nice results with the stock film holders, and allows enlargements to 32x40 fairly easily. I prefer Smart Sharpening over USM.

[Keith S. Walklet]

John, a couple things to consider.

1. The advantage of the higher resolution (beyond 2400spi) is not as apparent until you sharpen the files.

2. For film that isn't flat, you run the risk of it touching the glass and getting Newton rings. They won't show up in lower resolution scans, but do with higher resolution. I had this problem occur when test scans looked good, but the higher resolution scans showed the Newton rings. Upon closer inspection in the lower resolution files they will result in faint rainbow "clouds."

And I agree with you that sharpening after the fact is the way to go. Much more control.

[Jon Middleton]

I agree, Keith. For warped film, fluid mounting is the way to go. Not just plain glass. Maybe ANR glass would work, but I'll use fluid mounting for critical scans with 120 film.

There may be gains to be had with 4x5 scans with fluid mounting vs film holders, but I can't demonstrate it. My results showed little, if any difference between .125" and .140" off the platen, and no real improvement with fluid mounting. It would be interesting to know the DOF of the scanner itself. In other words, how unflat can film be before you see a degradation of your scans?

I am surprised at how much sharpening improves images. It really shows up in prints. I'm very happy with prints to 11x14. Not sure how big you could go, but I don't have a lot of wall space, anyway.