Making a scanner with a DSLR

[Old-N-Feeble]

Some interesting ideas here.

What if one were to... Remove the SLR lens from the equation by removing the CCD sensor from the camera body and "contact print" the film image directly onto the sensor with a well-regulated back-lit box then stitch those images together (no lens distortion). Even if the filtered glass becomes damaged those are replaceable, right?

What if one were to... Remove the scanner bar from a HQ flatbed and mount it in a fixed position, build a variable-speed-driven drum that's been precision smoothed and frosted and lit on the inside, and drive that system with the flatbed scanner's factory software?

[alexn]

Any half reasonable DSLR macro lens suitable for this kind of job will have next to no distortion anyway... I had a 105 F/2.8 VR Nikkor and now have the 200mm F/4 Nikkor and both are flawless for exactly this kind of job...

I have done a few slides with my D3X+200 F/4 Micro-Nikkor and got good results however it does not rival a good drum scan and to be honest, the results are not better than I have seen from a V700 or V750.

The scans I did were 6x17 slides at 1:1 with the 200mm F/4 on a rig I made up to position the camera above my light box and allow horizontal movement. once one row of images was taken the rig was moved down 20mm and the next row was shot.

3x6 35mm images with reasonable overlap resulted in a 390 odd megapixel final image.

My light box is an electroluminecent sheet under a piece of clear perspex.. I take an image first of the light box to gain the correct exposure. I then use this image as a custom white balance to be sure that the colours in the slide are correct.

I then lay my slide ontop of the piece of perspex, lay another 2mm sheet of anti-reflection glass ontop of the slide to ensure flatness and begin imaging. It took perhaps 1.5 hours to get the rig set up, expose, white balance correct, then image the 18 sections. A further hour to stitch and clean up (used ptGUI and have used Photoshop's Automate -> Photomerge in the past.) Another 30~40 minutes to clean up any dust marks (both from the slide, and dust marks from the D3X's sensor... So we are up to 3 hours to get a lesser result than you can achieve with a V700 in 30 minutes for 1/10th of the price of my D3 and 200 F/4... Oh, and the V700 does not require you to make a custom rig to do the scan, does not require you to be bent over taking the images and setting it all up for a 3 hour period. you load your slide/neg and let it rip...

Forgive me for being negative on the matter but the old saying "if it aint broke, dont fix it" comes to mind.

Flatbeds work fine and if you want higher quality, get a good drum scan done..

In AUD, my D3X cost $8900, the 200 F/4 was $1400, the lightbox setup including perspex and glass plates cost about $150 and the rig I made costs about $250.

For just shy of $10,000 AUD you can get a hell of a lot of drum scans done.. Or you could buy a ton of film, and a V750 and start doing what we all love doing. Making photographs.

[Peter De Smidt]

I'm not going to waste time arguing about the feasibility of the project for the umpteenth time.

The second lighting prototype is done. Before making it, I spent some time looking at my De Vere mixing box, and I learned a few things. (I had based my first light source off of the mixing box on my Philips PCs2000.) First, there's not a 45* panel opposite the light source. Instead, the "reflector" panel is at a much smaller incline, just enough that on the end opposite the light source the reflector comes up exactly the to the level of the opening through which the light enters the box. The idea, I expect, is to spread the light from the source over as much of the reflector as possible. The De Vere uses a profiled piece of diffusion plastic to even out the light. Instead of that, about 1 inch above the high point of the reflector sheet, I put a sheet of diffusion. Another inch up (or so) there's the final sheet of diffusion plastic. The lighted opening is bigger than before, and I've fixed everything in place, so that the whole apparatus can't shift when I attach the flash.

[Daniel Moore]

But responding to Alexn's post (which I differentiate from Alexn, the man, who I credit with logical prowess better than demonstrated there) must have been fun, how often do you get to use the word 'umpteenth'! I love that word.

Looking very much forward to seeing the new light source results.

[Peter De Smidt]

Old-N-Feeble said:
"What if one were to... Remove the SLR lens from the equation by removing the CCD sensor from the camera body and "contact print" the film image directly onto the sensor with a well-regulated back-lit box then stitch those images together (no lens distortion). Even if the filtered glass becomes damaged those are replaceable, right?

What if one were to... Remove the scanner bar from a HQ flatbed and mount it in a fixed position, build a variable-speed-driven drum that's been precision smoothed and frosted and lit on the inside, and drive that system with the flatbed scanner's factory software?"

Sounds like something you should try.

[Kirk Gittings]

"For just shy of $10,000 AUD you can get a hell of a lot of drum scans done.. Or you could buy a ton of film, and a V750 and start doing what we all love doing. Making photographs."

Why am I interested in this? The DSLR I buy primarily to make a living with-turning it into a scanner is just gravy. The 750 just doesn't cut it for real exhibition quality prints and as a result I spend allot of $ on drum scans.

[alexn]

In no way was I saying your project is not feasable. I mean't no disrespect at all to your project or your method of achieving the goals you have for yourself. I was only adding to this thread to share my similar project and my thoughts and feelings towards the results I obtained with my setup.

This is not to say that someone can not possibly achieve better than I did, nor that you couldnt with proper testing and calibration produce a digital file that is equal to that of a good quality scan.. Simply stating that with my method and equipment I could not.

Outstanding use of umpteenth... I like it!

[Peter De Smidt]

No worries, Alex. I appreciate you're sharing the results from something that you put a lot of work into.

[Peter De Smidt]

New lighthouse files are at: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/3595413/Ligh...02nd%20try.rar

[Old-N-Feeble]

Peter... In my younger years I definitely would have. I just don't have the time, energy nor brain-power anymore.