All about Better Light scanning back

[MunichPrag]

Hallo,


I would like to start here new Thread which would be related to Better Light scanning backs only.

Please post here all usefull information which might be helpfull for those who do reconsider using Better Light for their work .

Thank you for you help in advance.

Daniel

[MunichPrag]

These are the latest posts* about Better Light which were posted in another*Thread:



I just can't see using a scanning back for landscape ... Even when using film I still wait for the lull in the wind to make an exposure..

I may still only have a 1/2 sec. of calm conditions and sometimes that isn't perfectly calm

Does one just have to limit their subjects to not include: streams, trains, people, grass lands, animals, macro, not to mention the problems with using long lenses?
steve



The Betterlight scan back works like a flatbed scanner, in that it scans lines across the film plane. Depending on the model, it has to scan about 8,000 lines to make one (slightly smaller) 4x5 image. Those 8,000 lines can be exposed for up to 1/8th sec. each, making for very long exposures overall, but only 1/8th sec. per line. Not only that, but each line gets exposed by a trilinear sensor, meaning that each of 3 colors gets scanned separately with each line. The scanback software stitches the 3 colors together and also the 8,000 lines in the controller box. If something is moving, the colors can become out of register, and the separate lines also won't align. Thus the need for stillness. Here is a crop from a shot I intentionally took with some motion. Each line got 1/30th sec. for an overall exposure time (1/30th x 8,000) of approx 2.5 minutes.
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=64888&d=1323271592
Peter



you can end up with images like that, or images like http://betterlight.com/gallery/MC_gallery/MC_lobby.html or pretty much anything at Stephen Johnson's site http://www.sjphoto.com/


90% of my shooting is in the morning.. wind at that time is rarely an issue.... and if it is, I shoot film. I find it particularly useful when shooting old glass.. no shutter is needed, and you can see the effect when you are shooting. For the most part, my exposure time ranges from 35-60 seconds. Have been a happy user since 2001.


I'd second a look at Stephen Johnson's work. He should be applauded for being a pioneer in the practical outdoor use of a scanning back and coming up with actual
display prints that way, but it's definitely not the kind of look I would want for
my own work. Sheet film is way more practical, and to me at least, more "authentic"
in potential results, especially when one considers how difficult it is for outdoor subject
matter to stay stationary even a full second, plus all the other factors of reliability
and potential tech repair, expense amortization, and rapid obsolescene. I just don't
see any substitute on the horizon for real film, unless you're talking about relatively
small-scale garden-variety reproduction like stock photography for publication.


*
Film vs. Digital? Continued ..
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=57910

[johnmsanderson]

Random Question: Is there anywhere that rents these backs in NYC? I tried a bunch of places with no luck.

Thx!

[Jim collum]

send an email to Mike Collette at Betterlight (owner) @ mike@betterlight.com ...he'll know who rents them

jim

[williamtheis]

I've been using the betterlight for outdoor landscape photography for about two years. In that time I've been very impressed with the quality of the scan and think it exceeds what I can do with my 8x10 camera--when it works. It's also the best digital capture and looks more like a Sigma Foveon capture (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foveon_X3_sensor) (red, green, blue measured AT EACH PIXEL rather than conventional digital that interpolates ALL colors--therefore there is no Bayer filter for antialiasing and high frequency blur applied to the image).

There are three main subject areas where I still use film since the betterlight has problems:

1) when anything is moving. since the capture of red/green/blue is not simulateous but sequential [there are 3 linear arrays] there is a funny kind of fringing when there is movement. I can post examples if this is unclear. They can be retouched (desaturated and cloned out) but this can be a lot of work. Usually I will take 2-3 scans and layer them, taking unblurred sections out of the three into a single exposure. sometimes though the wind blows the subject the same place in each one :mad:. You also sometimes have to anticipate when the wind will stop and start the exposure--or cancel it if you guess wrong.

2) in low light. when light levels are low, the scan is slow. Even at the slowest scanning speed (where the line dwell time is reduced to maximum), there may be a buildup of noise if the ISO (gain on the linear arrays) is increased to maximum. The noise is also strange with strips where the capture of one of the lines changes in gain with respect to the next... again, I can post an example.

3) when there are specular highlights. Probably the least problem but when there is a specular highlight the entire CCD array is filled by the extra photoelectrons generated in a single pixel so that there is a white "stripe" that must be retouched. a work around is to add neutral density filters, drop the f/stop [starve the light to the sensor to prevent the overload], and drop the gain (ISO). this makes for VERY long exposures even though you are in bright light!

also realize that the sensor area is not a full 4x5 so I purchased a shorter focal length lens (135mm) as my "normal"... and an Arca Swiss for the rigidity since my wooden folder had problems with the extra weight (and torque due to the SCSI cord that attaches to the back)

but with the pain comes lots of gain. there probably is no sensor like it presently (other than the very low resolution Foveon, as I said). Even stitching a bunch of DSLR or medium format captures will not approach the inner detail and accutance of the Betterlight since they all employ antialias and other filters.

Rarely (almost never) do I use the full resolution... I content myself with a 300 dpi 20"x30" capture... riduculous really unless I plan on printing a billboard meant to viewed at a few inches!

as an example, I present the following captured at this resolution

fireplace (http://imageworkx.us/digital/fireplace.html)

petroglyphs (http://imageworkx.us/digital/Image_16_DNG_LAB2rgb.html)

looking forward to questions!

Bill

[Mark Sawyer]

A question about Michael Collette's work; his "Coastal 2005-07" series has several images that show the ocean with very natural-looking wave action frozen as if by a quick exposure, (none of the distortion or color artifacts one would expect from a scanning back). Yet his writings on the site suggest all images are made with the Better Light back. Is there some way around the slow scan?

[Peter Mounier]

Did you see those on the Betterlight site, or somewhere else. I briefly looked for them through Goggle but came up empty. He does have some photos taken at Pt. Lobos on the Betterlight site, but they are clearly affected by the motion of the waves.

Peter

[Mark Sawyer]

Did you see those on the Betterlight site, or somewhere else.

On the Better Light site:

http://betterlight.com/gallery/MC_gallery/MC_coastal/MC_coastal.html

See the large image the page opens with (it's also the fifth thumbnail from the left), the second thumbnail from the left, and the thumbnail all the way to the right.

[Peter Mounier]

According to the file info the scan time was 32 sec. Each line time was 1/250th sec. (x8,000 lines) Those areas in the image where there is white water, it is mostly lateral motion and not really any vertical movement. So as the water moves, it stays sharp because of the line time, and distortion is kept to a minimum because the water is moving parallel to the sensor. Any color registration artifacts can be repaired with color noise filter in Photoshop relatively easily in such a small area.

This is mostly speculation on my part, but seems reasonable.

Peter

[Chokourov]

Bill
Thanks for shearing really useful as I feel totally isolated with my scanning back.
I use Sinar P2 and KIGAMO 8000 same as Betterlight have some trouble with the noise "paragraph 2)" appear in shadows across scan direction even if loads of light (Use 3 HMI X 150W )
I did ask Kigamo Germany about and this is answer

"as for noise > if it is parallel with the ccd then it is probably because you are pushing the curve too much - open an f-stop or pick a slower line time and it should go away."

But .. The F stop I need for DOF The lens I use will go down to F32 with no aberration visible on the samples I send F stop to 22.
I base exposure on curve diagramm and in order not to blow specular Highlites adjust scan speed down until I see highlights reads 240 in the Tulip sample it is set to 1/4 sec/line with Studio and resolution down to 50% which give like 2f extra stops of sencivity. May be I'm doing something wrong.
Can you please help, may be give idea on settings Ill try to figure out the rest.


Also would be nice to see what noise you was mentioning in 2) looks like

Regards

Ilia

P.S How you upload large Jpeg here ???

2) in low light. when light levels are low, the scan is slow. Even at the slowest scanning speed (where the line dwell time is reduced to maximum), there may be a buildup of noise if the ISO (gain on the linear arrays) is increased to maximum. The noise is also strange with strips where the capture of one of the lines changes in gain with respect to the next... again, I can post an example.

[Chokourov]

Here is the tulip sample I have to downsize it so not sure if the noise on black would be visible this have not been edited straight from scanning back Tiff file. setting on the back was 1/8 of max resolution 1/4sec F32 on Rodenstock Makro-Sironar 210mm f/5.6

84994

I also uploaded the original 60mb tiff to transferbigfiles the link below

https://www.transferbigfiles.com/72f38c35-99fa-4e74-8724-a54523bcc68d?rid=exapdKCMUYSb3TjJOXaHsQ2

( it would expire in 5 days if anyone interested after just ask )

Appeciate any input on the matter.

[Peter Mounier]

A lot of noise at the highest sensitivity is fairly normal. It doesn't show up much in your small version, but it screams at you with the full res image you uploaded.
The "black" background in your image isn't really black. If you intend for it to be pitch black, lower the ISO a bit if you can. The RGB numbers, taken from the middle of the image are pretty high, being approx. r-32 g-38 b-19. If you can lower the iso to get those numbers down to about 10 each, you'd be going a long way in reducing the amount of noise.
Another method of reducing noise in the scans is a method described by Robin Myers from Betterlight. The method is quoted from his post to the Betterlight users forum ...

"One method is to use image averaging.

Take 4 images of the artwork. These must be different exposures, NOT
the same image duplicated 4 times.

In Photoshop, open all 4 images and use the "Apply Image" command to
average the images. Bring Image 1 to the front and choose the
Image/Apply Image menu command. In the dialog window, select Image 2
for the "Source", "Background" for the "Layer", "RGB" for the
"Channel", "Add" for the "Blending", set the "Opacity" to 100, "Scale"
to 2, "Offset" to 0. The average of the two images will be calculated
and it will replace Image 1.

Bring Image 3 to the front and repeat the procedure with Image 4
selected for the "Source". When it finishes Image 3 will contain the
average.

Bring Image 1 to the front and repeat the procedure one more time with
Image 3 selected for the "Source". The average of all four images will
now be in Image 1.

Save Image 1 as a new file.

Averaging 4 images together will reduce the noise by 1/2 (i.e. one EV,
or one "f/stop"). So your ISO value of 800 would now be the equivalent
of 400."

Peter

[Chokourov]

Peter
Thanks I just made the setup almoust as it was and set F32 1/8 and lowest iso possible took 11min to scan at 50% resolution, result is much better! Will upload soon. Steel strugle with black background I use clack paper card but is a lot of light and card is A2 so I can't set it fare enought any sugestions would be much appreciated :-)

Thanks for the tip on photoshop image avereging but it looks like HDR to me ?
Would be good to have a look at Better light forum but to get membership on Betterlight forum need to be an owner of one??

Have tou tried photographing jewellery yourself with scanner?

Ilia

[Peter Mounier]

Now that you mention it, it does sound like HDR. I tested it out for myself a couple years ago, and it works. What I forgot to mention was that each of the exposures are the same exposure. Just shoot it four times with the exact same exposure, then average them. Apparently the noise is random enough that averaging the exposures out, smoothes out the noise.

I have not done jewelry with the BL. I mostly shoot paintings with it. I think you're right, you do have to purchase a scanner from BL to get membership in their forum.

Regarding your black card in the background, have you tried dragging the cure to make the "almost black" black?

Peter

[B.S.Kumar]

I use my Betterlight scanback for architecture, interiors and landscape.

A couple of tricks from when I used to do a bit of product work:

Instead of black card, use black flocked paper, or velvet, both of which are "blacker". Use a small, black painted, T-shaped rod to support the flower and get it further away from the background. Use black flags to ensure that light spill onto the background is minimized.

Hope this helps.

Kumar

[Chokourov]

Kumar
Thanks for a a tip I odered piece of black velvet today, simple it less reflective so is blacker !

Love your BW photos kinda captivating to look at

[B.S.Kumar]

Glad to be of help, and thanks for the kind words.

Kumar

[Chokourov]

Kumar
Would it be possible for you to share one shot from scanning back (or crop with pure white and deep black best in colour mode) in raw with all meta-data ( ISO, sensitivity setting), lens, F stop, exposure (time per line) etc screen grab from controlling soft with Curve would do it all ( I think )
This would give me at least something to try and see if I can get clean result?
Many thanks in advance
ILia

[B.S.Kumar]

I will get you something in a day or two.

Kumar

[Chokourov]

Many thanks to Kumar great help!! I finally manage to get close to perfect results from my Kigamo 8000 scanning back, Sinar X, Macro-Sironar 210mm combo
86869

Single shot, F16, 1/50, 8000 x 11320 pixels original (if someone interested is bigger than A1 @ 300 DPI print) used one HMI light plus two reflectors, minimal postprocessing ( have to soften a bit )
Any comments-critics welcome

[Urs]

I have been following this forum in a passive way but would like to ask for your advice now:
I'm a hobby photographer (architecture, landscape, pieces of art) without, alas, much spare time for my hobby. I gave up darkroom activities (black & white) some years ago, and since what I liked most in b&w was large format my LF activities are reduced to some pictures on sheet film now and then, with decreasing frequency since my stock of Readyload is diminishing... Now I got the occasion to buy a used BetterLight 8K at a reasonable price (about 2500 US $). I have to say that a BL back has been a dream for years, knowing that I never could afford one (or legitimate the investment to my wife...).
Now my question: Do you think it is worth to buy this piece of equipment now, knowing that for the next four years until retirement I will not have much more time for my hobby than in the past years. Is this a twist of fate, something like a last chance to get a jewel that will never be replaced, or would it be an act of nostalgic silliness to buy an outdated piece of equipment with all the related risks and problems (I lost my Leica DMR last summer because the spare part needed was no longer available). I'ts not a question of scan back vs. fixed sensor or the like. I am well aware of these aspects. Thanks a lot for your comments (and excuse my english).
Urs

[Jim collum]

I bought mine back in 2001.. and has never had a problem. i've done upgrades during that period (make sure yours is USB, rather than SCSI).

Betterlight has closed it's doors, but even closed, Mike (the owner and creator of the Betterlight back) provides better customer support than any other company I've dealt with.

I'd suggest getting the serial # from the unit and sending him an email. He'd know the history of the unit.

That being said.. the 8K is a more finicky than the 6K or Super 6K. It's slower, and much more prone to exhibiting artifacts from camera motion. It's really designed to be set up for art reproduction. The other backs I mentioned are geared towards architecture and landscape. The extra resolution you'll get from the 8K will surpass the ability of most lenses to resolve.

There are additional logistics involved.. but if you're on a large format forum.. most of those apply to any film view camera. The battery/laptop/control unit isn't that much more space/weight than a bunch of film holders. You do have to be careful about wind (camera vibration being a much bigger issue than subject being blown by it).

You'll either love it or hate it... (mine's the oldest digital camera i own.. and i still use it regularly).


I have been following this forum in a passive way but would like to ask for your advice now:
I'm a hobby photographer (architecture, landscape, pieces of art) without, alas, much spare time for my hobby. I gave up darkroom activities (black & white) some years ago, and since what I liked most in b&w was large format my LF activities are reduced to some pictures on sheet film now and then, with decreasing frequency since my stock of Readyload is diminishing... Now I got the occasion to buy a used BetterLight 8K at a reasonable price (about 2500 US $). I have to say that a BL back has been a dream for years, knowing that I never could afford one (or legitimate the investment to my wife...).
Now my question: Do you think it is worth to buy this piece of equipment now, knowing that for the next four years until retirement I will not have much more time for my hobby than in the past years. Is this a twist of fate, something like a last chance to get a jewel that will never be replaced, or would it be an act of nostalgic silliness to buy an outdated piece of equipment with all the related risks and problems (I lost my Leica DMR last summer because the spare part needed was no longer available). I'ts not a question of scan back vs. fixed sensor or the like. I am well aware of these aspects. Thanks a lot for your comments (and excuse my english).
Urs

[Urs]

Thank you, Jim. Getting the serial number is a good idea.
I'm aware that the 8K-HS might be an overkill, both with respect to my equipment and to my technique. But since there are so few occasions to get a LF scan back (right now there's just one offered on eBay world-wide, with a SCSI interface compatible with OS 9...) that I feel I have to take it - if only there wasn't this unpleasant doubt about the "sustainability" of the decision.

[NickyLai]

Is this a twist of fate, something like a last chance to get a jewel that will never be replaced, or would it be an act of nostalgic silliness to buy an outdated piece of equipment with all the related risks and problems ...
Urs

:confused: A dream of your fate is something worth more than money. Get it while you can. Everything, new or old, get outdated sooner or later, the best is to pick and put those fit into your own plan of fate.



Betterlight has closed it's doors, but even closed, Mike (the owner and creator of the Betterlight back) provides better customer support than any other company I've dealt with.


BetterLight NOT CLOSED, but MOVED into their own facility, a down sizing strategy from manufacturing to servicing and photographic activity. I believe Mike will continue to provide excellent equipment service, parts and photographic information for years to come. I meet him when I attended their 2009 scan-back-owners conference. He, for decades, is an design engineer and a Large Format photographer. Their new facility information is here: http://www.betterlight.com/contactCompany.html

[NickyLai]

I'm aware that the 8K-HS might be an overkill,

:cool: Wait until it pair with the BetterLight Panorama adapter.

Quote from their website:

This system can capture seamless 360 degree digital panoramic scans and wide-view images of adjustable aspect ratio, with wide or long lenses, up to 8,000 x 65,000 pixels — the largest digital panoramic images currently possible.

:unquote. More info here: http://www.betterlight.com/panoWideView.html

It can be done with ONE-SHOT only. Then you are way over and can forget the digital pixel race.

BTW, I have one of those and loved it. Enclosed a photo, made last year with my setup, of Tuolumne Meadow in 365 degree round panorama. The image isn't look long because it was captured with a super wide angle lens - 38mm Aerogor Goerz. The wide angle lens made the file size smaller and easier to manage (original size 6,846 x 30,258 pixels).

[Jim collum]

a thumbs up on the pano adapter. if you're going to spring for an 8K, see if you can find one of those around as well :)

(Ta Prohm, Cambodia)
http://www.getdpi.com/gallery/files/1/2/2005_10_11_bl_angkor_030-bw.jpg

but for me, one of the biggest advantages is to be able to use any lens without a shutter... pretty much get immediate feedback on the effects rendered with old lenses

[zloyx]

Could anybody provide an information on the cable between usb2box and scanning back?
Is it an ordinary d-sub 25-25 nullmodem cable?

[B.S.Kumar]

From Michael Collette in a BL forum posting:

The "insert cable" connects the scanning insert ("back") with its control box. This is a straight-through IEEE-1284 compliant "extension" cable with D-25 connectors at both ends that should be double-shielded (braid plus foil wrap), and no longer than 25 feet.

If you haven't joined the Betterlight Yahoo forum, I suggest you do so, by sending an email to Mike - mike at betterlight dot com. There's a wealth of information there.

Kumar