Which Anti-Newton Spray?

[Frank Petronio]

And where to buy it?

Any chance that a $5 can of Krylon Matte Clear does the same thing?

Here I am scanning 8x10 TMX on a flatbed w AN glass on top, emulsion down, just like I've been told to do... but it is a humid day and I am getting nothing but Newton Rings...

I tried talcum powder but it clumps and I can't get it finely distributed...

grrr...

[felix5616]

Try an anti-newton spray from a company called Prazio. I have several of their products.

[Bruce Watson]

Try an anti-newton spray from a company called Prazio. I have several of their products.

Yep. Works well and is easy to remove from the film without harming it or causing any contamination that will hurt the film's archivalness (no, I'm not going to define what that means ;-). Good for about a 3-4x enlargement. After that you can see it in the scan as a sorta gritty look. If you need more enlargement than that, time for a full fluid mount.

[Daniel_Buck]

After trying a few things (wanting not to get chemicals/liquids involved) I ended up finding the solution that works best for me, with zero newton's rings! I take the ANR glass, tape my film to the matte side of the glass (emulsion towards the ANR matte surface, 1 piece of tape for each corner, and 1 piece for each side, 8 in total) then I 'suspend' the glass/film over my scanner by placing 1 penny at each corner of the glass, with the film facing the scanner glass. This suspends the film over the scanner glass so that the film doesn't touch it (which means no rings!) and the emulsion side touching the ANR glass again leaves no rings :-)

It's not as fast a setup as I would like, but in reality it only takes a few minutes, and seems to work perfectly! I ordered my ANR glass a bit larger than my film, so that I could place the pennies in the corners of the glass and not have the pennies actually touch the film, so no scratches. :-)

[ljsegil]

Daniel--what kind of scanner are you using and have you found any focusing problems when elevating the film?
Larry

[Nathan Potter]

Well Frank I hate to suggest it but visit your wifes bathroom. Borrow a hair dryer and gently heat the scanner plate and the film to drive off moisture. It's tricky, but don't heat too hot. Also there is a risk that as the film/plate cool during the scan there will be contraction in the neg which could change the image dimension ever so slightly. But recently this has worked for me in my basement darkroom.

Nate Potter, Austin TX.

[Frank Petronio]

Daniel - that works like a charm! thanks

[Walter Calahan]

Emulsion goes up, not down.

[Daniel_Buck]

Daniel--what kind of scanner are you using and have you found any focusing problems when elevating the film?
I'm using an Epson 4990, which I believe is 'focused' a slight bit above the glass, so the pennies actually probably put the film close to the correct focus area too. But that was not my reason for suspending the film/glass, it was so that the film didn't touch the scanner glass.


Daniel - that works like a charm! thanks
good! Are you using a 4990 too? I was going bonkers over the newton's rings myself too. I absolutly love shooting 8x10, looking at the larger glass is addictive! But I was having so much trouble scanning the film, I was bummed about that so I stopped shooting 8x10 it for a bit until I figured out my scanning method with the pennies and ANR glass. I guess 8x10 is really to big for film holders (like for 4x5 sheets) cause the film will sag down to much?

If you're using the 4990, you need to watch out at the top of the scanning glass (area closest to the lid hinge) you can't cover up that last 1/3 inch or so, the area that the "film area guide" mask has a notch cut out of it. For some reason, if you cover that area up (with a penny, glass, or whatever) the scanner will put a black line through the image. I don't quite understand why, but when you cover up that area the scanner thinks you're trying to use a film holder or something. Here was my post that has more info if you ever have the same problem!

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=37732


Emulsion goes up, not down.
For my method, the emulsion faces up, up against the ANR glass. So from top to bottom it is:

ANR glass (matteside down), Film (emulsion up) taped to the matte side of the ANR glass, Pennies, Scanner glass.

[Lenny Eiger]

Here I am scanning 8x10 TMX on a flatbed w AN glass on top, emulsion down, just like I've been told to do... but it is a humid day and I am getting nothing but Newton Rings...

Why not use what all the pros use - Kami or some other form of liquid? It seems like an exercise in futility when there is something that works and doesn't hurt the film...

Lenny

[Steve M Hostetter]

I hear you can send Mr. Grimes your 4x5" transparency holder and he will make an 8x10" glassless film holder to work just like the 4x5 holder does... No need for gooy stuff on your negs

[Lenny Eiger]

No need for gooy stuff on your negs

Mountng fluid isn't gooey.

Lenny

[Daniel_Buck]

I hear you can send Mr. Grimes your 4x5" transparency holder and he will make an 8x10" glassless film holder to work just like the 4x5 holder does... No need for gooy stuff on your negs

interesting! I wonder how well it works? Anyone know? I would imagine that the film sags quite a bit, and might even touch the scanner glass? I'd love to hear more about this, if anyone has one!

[Brian K]

There's another solution, anti newton powder, or anti offset powder. It's a super fine powder, in the size of 15-20 microns (1/50th of a mm) , that does not clump and is so small as to be virtually invisible. Looking at the particles under my microscope, the particles are about the size of fine film grain.

What you do is put some of this powder in a small squeeze bottle, not a mister but a sprayer that is coarser, and you spray a little of this into the air. The heavier, larger clumps fall immediately, but a nearly invisible cloud of the tiniest particles are still momentarily suspended. You quickly pass your film through the cloud and some of these super tiny particles will stick to the film. This provides a microscopic texture and spacing that prevents the newton rings from forming. The particles can easily be blown off with compressed air.

[Frank Petronio]

Is that powder the same that pressmen use on commercial litho presses? That would be cheap and readily available at the local commercial paper and ink suppliers...

I don't want the hassle of wet mounting for what is only going to be a consumer flatbed scan? Ultimately, if the picture is good enough it will hopefully be scanned on something better. I just want a time-efficient way to get a decent scan for making 11x14 inkjets... whether we call them finals or simply decent proofs all depends on how far I want to bullshit myself. So far my 11x14s look pretty darn great but I wouldn't want to print the same files really large if I have the potential to do better.

After some experimentation, I've found that on dry days simply doing the Walter Calahan method of emulsion up against Anti-Newton matte surface down works well enough. On sticky days taping the negative to the AN glass and placing the glass on top of four pennies does the trick.

Frankly I don't see the point of busting my butt to tweak the last bit of performance out of a $500 flatbed scanner -- wet mounting, custom holders, cleaning the internal components, and other expensive and time consuming methods -- when the right solution is to go and get a real scan from a high end scanner. But not every negative deserves that expense and trouble, so getting a decent flatbed scan that I can use to make a good 11x14 inkjet (and web view jpg) is the immediate task at hand.

And when I get a grant or find some money I'll deal with the high-end scans.... right now I rather make 20 scans a week on the flatbed and see my work progress faster than if I declare everything a masterpiece from the get-go.

[Brian K]

Is that powder the same that pressmen use on commercial litho presses? That would be cheap and readily available at the local commercial paper and ink suppliers...

I don't want the hassle of wet mounting for what is only going to be a consumer flatbed scan? Ultimately, if the picture is good enough it will hopefully be scanned on something better. I just want a time-efficient way to get a decent scan for making 11x14 inkjets... whether we call them finals or simply decent proofs all depends on how far I want to bullshit myself. So far my 11x14s look pretty darn great but I wouldn't want to print the same files really large if I have the potential to do better.

After some experimentation, I've found that on dry days simply doing the Walter Calahan method of emulsion up against Anti-Newton matte surface down works well enough. On sticky days taping the negative to the AN glass and placing the glass on top of four pennies does the trick.

Frankly I don't see the point of busting my butt to tweak the last bit of performance out of a $500 flatbed scanner -- wet mounting, custom holders, cleaning the internal components, and other expensive and time consuming methods -- when the right solution is to go and get a real scan from a high end scanner. But not every negative deserves that expense and trouble, so getting a decent flatbed scan that I can use to make a good 11x14 inkjet (and web view jpg) is the immediate task at hand.

And when I get a grant or find some money I'll deal with the high-end scans.... right now I rather make 20 scans a week on the flatbed and see my work progress faster than if I declare everything a masterpiece from the get-go.

Frank, I think it's the same stuff. The pressmen call it anti-offset powder. It's used to keep freshly printed sheets from sticking to our smearing each other. Be aware though that there are different diameters for this powder, some of them might be coarse enough to show up if you use enough magnification. But given that you're talking a prosumer flatbed and not making very large prints any of those powders will work. You can also use corn starch, which is what the powders are made of except that their particles are more uniform and smaller in size.

The whole spraying into the air and then passing your film through the cloud of the tiniest particles is CRITICAL.

Let me know if it works for you.