Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 51

Thread: KAMI wet mount scanner kits

  1. #21

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta
    Posts
    1,102

    Re: KAMI wet mount scanner kits

    I invested in a piece of Tru-Vue "Museum Glass," and although it is rather pricey, it works very well. I do however, pay great attention to the surface of the non-reflective film, located on the back of the Museum Glass, since I do not want to scratch this surface. Lastly, you should not cover the calibration gap with your makeshift piece of glass, since this will introduce banding in the scanned image.

    jim k

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    5,506

    Re: KAMI wet mount scanner kits

    Quote Originally Posted by jim kitchen View Post
    Lastly, you should not cover the calibration gap with your makeshift piece of glass, since this will introduce banding in the scanned image.

    jim k
    Interesting. I cover the calibration gap with the glass and have had no banding problem with either the Epson 4870 or Microtek 9800XL. What scanner are you using and wonder what causes the banding?

    Sandy King
    Last edited by sanking; 2-Oct-2006 at 16:35.

  3. #23

    Re: KAMI wet mount scanner kits

    Quote Originally Posted by sanking View Post

    I have used the Kami fluid but find that it sometimes evaporates with very long scans so I use Johnson Baby Oil whenever the scan will take more than about five or ten minutes. After the scan I wash the negative in a tray of hot water to which I add a degreaser, then hang to dry. This is all very easy to do and does improve significantly the quality of the scan.


    Sandy King
    I tried the kami since Aztek is just down the street from me.I now use the Lumina Super Fluid.It still evaporates, but not nearly as fast as the kami does.After I'm done I hang the neg to dry just like with the kami, but it takes longer and leaves no residue.I haven't been doing this very long and can't imagine using baby oil, sounds like quite a mess.I havent had any problems with long scans.Also as far as the glass thickness thing, I scan with the glass on top and the trans scan overlay on the bottom as per Scanmax instructions.Have not tried it the other way.If anyone has tried it both ways I'd be interested to hear about the difference.



    Chris

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    2,955

    Re: KAMI wet mount scanner kits

    Has anyone tried a solution of an humectant, such as glycerol, and water as a wet-mount fluid? If it works (no idea) it would be cleap, nontoxic, easy to clean. The question is how much would it retard the evaporation rate.
    Last edited by Ron Marshall; 2-Oct-2006 at 17:44.

  5. #25

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    5,506

    Re: KAMI wet mount scanner kits

    Quote Originally Posted by Chris Strobel View Post
    I haven't been doing this very long and can't imagine using baby oil, sounds like quite a mess.I havent had any problems with long scans.Also as far as the glass thickness thing, I scan with the glass on top and the trans scan overlay on the bottom as per Scanmax instructions.Have not tried it the other way.If anyone has tried it both ways I'd be interested to hear about the difference.


    Chris
    To clairify, I don't use the baby oil unless necessary. However, it definitely works better with some negatives, say those that have a bit of curl, than the solvent fluids. And cleaning the negative of the oil is really not that big a deal. As I said, a couple of minutes in a warm rinse with a few drops of adegreasing liquid detergent and the oil is removed.

    However, I have been scanning some 7X17 negatives that have no curl at all and these scan perfectly with the Kami fluid and no tape. I don't sandwich the negative, as Scanmax recommends. I just place the negative emulsion side down over the fluid and push out the bubbles with a clean cloth.

    Sandy

  6. #26

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta
    Posts
    1,102

    Re: KAMI wet mount scanner kits

    Dear Sandy,

    I had an Epson 4990 and now own a 750...

    While laying the negative emulsion side down on the scanning glass, I would cover the negative with the 3mil glass. My first attempts covered the calibration gap, and severe banding occurred on both scanner models. I cut the glass to a shorter length, so not to cover the calibration gap, and the banding disappeared. It seems that the scanner can acquire noise from imperfect glass, when the calibration gap is covered. I changed the quality of the glass in my process because of this possible issue. There is a school of thought, indicating that the calibration gap should be covered to include and correct the colour of the glass during a calibration, but I do not and probably never will, resulting from my experience with banding issues.

    jim k

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    5,506

    Re: KAMI wet mount scanner kits

    Quote Originally Posted by jim kitchen View Post
    Dear Sandy,

    I had an Epson 4990 and now own a 750...

    While laying the negative emulsion side down on the scanning glass, I would cover the negative with the 3mil glass. My first attempts covered the calibration gap, and severe banding occurred on both scanner models. I cut the glass to a shorter length, so not to cover the calibration gap, and the banding disappeared. It seems that the scanner can acquire noise from imperfect glass, when the calibration gap is covered.

    jim k
    So you are covering the negative with glass? Are you using fluid between the glass and the negative?

    This appears very different from the way I work. As mentioned, I just place the negative emulsion side down on the carrier glass and rub out the bubbles with a clean cloth. I don't put anything over the negative. Some people tape a piece of thin mylar over the top of the negative, with fluid in between. I tried using glass once over the negative, with fluid, but found it impossible to get rid of all of the bubbles.

    In any event I always have had the carrier glass cut so it fits snug into the scanner, covering the calibration gap, and I have not had any problem with banding with either of the two flatbed I am currently using.

    Sandy King

  8. #28

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta
    Posts
    1,102

    Re: KAMI wet mount scanner kits

    Dear Sandy,

    For the moment, I am not using any fluid between the glass and the negative, and I lay the glass on top of the negative, pressing the negative's emulsion against the scanning bed glass, and the negative is set within the boundaries of the Epson film guide holder. I use the glass to keep the negative flat during a scan. The anti-reflective film on the back of the Museum Glass prevents moire, as it touches the back of the film. I obviously modify the image in Photoshop afterwards to correct the orientation of the negative.

    I will, however, change that approach shortly to try to realize the benefits inherent to the wet mounting process. I read an article, submitted by Ernst Dinkla, on the Yahoo ScanHi-End newsgroup that intrigued me, and I shall try his approach to fluid mounting with a flatbed scanner. It is not unlike your method, but there are differences, and Ernst discusses the focal point of the lenses, the orientation of the film and a few other points of interest. It is interesting reading. If you are interested, it is the message number 13858 within the Yahoo ScanHi-End newsgroup, located here: http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/S.../message/13858

    You should be able to read this message, but you will probably be asked to submit your Yahoo Id, and password...

    jim k

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    5,506

    Re: KAMI wet mount scanner kits

    Quote Originally Posted by jim kitchen View Post
    Dear Sandy,

    For the moment, I am not using any fluid between the glass and the negative, and I lay the glass on top of the negative, pressing the negative's emulsion against the scanning bed glass, and the negative is set within the boundaries of the Epson film guide holder. I use the glass to keep the negative flat during a scan. The anti-reflective film on the back of the Museum Glass prevents moire, as it touches the back of the film. I obviously modify the image in Photoshop afterwards to correct the orientation of the negative.

    I will, however, change that approach shortly to try to realize the benefits inherent to the wet mounting process. I read an article, submitted by Ernst Dinkla, on the Yahoo ScanHi-End newsgroup that intrigued me, and I shall try his approach to fluid mounting with a flatbed scanner. It is not unlike your method, but there are differences, and Ernst discusses the focal point of the lenses, the orientation of the film and a few other points of interest. It is interesting reading. If you are interested, it is the message number 13858 within the Yahoo ScanHi-End newsgroup, located here: http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/S.../message/13858

    You should be able to read this message, but you will probably be asked to submit your Yahoo Id, and password...

    jim k

    Jim,

    Thanks for the link. I will have a look at the article.

    I was curious why you were not having any trouble with Newton rings with the glass over the negative, but now I understand why you are using the museum glass. In fact, I have done the same thing in scanning 6X9 negatives with my Leafscan 45 using a glass mount. Some of the films I have scanned, HP5+ in particular, have such heavy curl that they won't stay flay even when taped down, so I used a piece of framing glass with the UV coating on top of the negative. This glass has a very light frosted side, perhaps like the museum glass you are using.

    Sandy

  10. #30

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta
    Posts
    1,102

    Re: KAMI wet mount scanner kits

    Dear Sandy,

    No problemo...

    I purchased this glass: http://www.ilovemuseumglass.com/aboutmuseumglass.asp from a local framing shop. I also incorporate this specific glass within my framed images for the galleries, and glass reflections totally disappear. I think it this is an outstanding product, but painfully expensive. I should also indicate that I am trying a piece of acrylic, where I can not and do not have the exact part number presently, as a replacement for the museum glass. I found acrylic to be just a bit tougher than glass...

    The idea came to me when I visited this site: http://www.scanhancer.com/ I desired an alternative to glass, while covering the negative for safety reasons, and resulting from the earlier mentioned banding issues I encountered. Museum Glass is fantastic, but acrylic provides a superb diffused light source for the scanned negative. I will not go back to glass. The owner of this website was very helpful, but he would not reveal the source of the material, for obvious reasons. Erik mentioned he would cut me a piece of his source material to the required dimensions, for a minimal price, so I could experiment with it, but we did not finish our discussion. Erik was quite considerate and very helpful...

    As an experiment, I sought out a local acrylic supplier, and I tried two types of acrylic, where one is brilliantly white and manufactured for light tables, the other duller and grey. The duller grey acrylic performs the best, because it seems to allow more diffused light to reach the negative, compared to the denser white acrylic. The shadow areas in my negatives are wonderfully recognized because I believe more diffused light reaches the sensors through the scanned negative. I recommend this acrylic approach to anyone. A scanned negative through a diffused light source is rather a joy to behold, and my results are too similar to Erik's web page to dismiss. I do not scan colour negatives or transparencies, so I do not know whether this material might affect the resultant image with a possible colour shift. I hope that wet mounting will improve this effort too. I will try to identify the source and part number of the acrylic to pass the information along. The acrylic is not manufactured to optical standards, but then again, I always drum scan my best negatives, so I did not consider any optical quality issues within the acrylic. Once I find the information I will post the manufacturer, and the possible part number. I plan to marry Ernst Dinkla's approach and the use of acrylic, to see whether the results are worth the effort. I think they will.

    jim k

Similar Threads

  1. Can an Enlarger and Flatbed Scanner be Used Together?
    By Michael Heald in forum Digital Processing
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 20-Sep-2006, 03:53
  2. Scanner comparison: Epson 4990 scanner added
    By Leigh Perry in forum Digital Hardware
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 28-Aug-2006, 05:35
  3. Epson Perfection 2450 scanner
    By Paul Cocklin in forum Digital Hardware
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 27-Apr-2005, 19:47
  4. Can a scanner be mdified to work with an enlarger?
    By Emile J Schwarz in forum Digital Hardware
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 8-Nov-2001, 14:00

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •