DSLR "Scanning" to Include Film Borders?

Hey all. I’m assembling a DSLR scanning rig using a light pad and tripod, and would like some advice.

I want to have the option of including film borders in my scans, and I don’t know of any film holders that allow this for medium format (Digitaliza holder does this only for 35mm), so I was thinking of sandwiching the film (emulsion side up) between two sheets of anti-newton ring glass. Is this a viable option? Will scanning through the ANR glass affect image quality since it is technically etched on one side? Should I instead use only one sheet of ANR glass to separate the film base from the light pad and then use a piece of regular or anti-reflective glass on top of the emulsion layer?

If anyone has any advice on this or suggestions on how I can otherwise have the option to include the borders for medium format please let me know! Thank you.

Any good reason you want to include the borders?

Why not just use a good glassless carrier, and artificially add borders digitally, if it's just for the 'look' of the thing?

I’m assembling a DSLR scanning rig using a light pad and tripod, and would like some advice.

Yes. Don't do it that way!

At least get a fixed copy stand. It'll take forever to get a tripod-mounted camera sufficiently well squared-up to a light box. And then it'll still be prone to vibration.

A continuous source light box isn't good either. They're designed simply for viewing, and the light source used may not accurately reproduce colour. They're also not really bright enough to compete with ambient room lighting, so you'll have to work in a darkened or dimly-lit room to avoid surface reflections off the film. Glass will present even more of a reflection issue.

There's no doubt in my mind that electronic flash is a superior way of back-illuminating film for copying. It has good and consistent colour output, and pretty much eliminates any vibration due to its short duration.

I want to include the borders because there are some images in which I like the look of the borders, and if they exist already on the negative, why not capture it while it's already physically there instead of messing around in photoshop?

Regardless, thanks for the tips! Maybe I'll adjust my set up, but that still leaves me searching for a way to capture the film borders in camera.

AN glass is etched, and will adversely affect the image if it is between the film and the camera or scanner. Nikon glass carriers use AN glass on the light source side, and coated, non-reflective glass on the scanner side of the film. If you place the emulsion side down, it's textured surface practically eliminates the chance of Newton's Rings, like the textured glass on the other side.

You should be able to iincluded borders in glassless carriers, but most have cross bars to keep the film from cupping, while holding the edges. If you use a copy stand (or similar technique), you can hold the film flat against a light box with weighted strips. You would need to re-center each frame, which will be time consuming.

Showing borders will affect exposure and white balance. While you can use manual settings for copying, converting color negatives must be automated to accommodate variations in exposure and the type of emulsion. Sooner or later, borders have to go for color negatives.

I "scan" film with cameras using a desk lamp, rather than a flash. Since everything is mounted solidly, long exposures (typically 1/4 sec @ f/5.6, ISO 400) aren't subject to vibrations. My copy fixture for 35 mm film is a Nikon ES-2, which is enclosed and shielded from ambient light. For medium format film, I use a Novoflex copy fixture, in a darkened room or covered with a darkcloth. LED replacement bulbs for room lights have consistent color, and work well. Incandescent bulbs, including high intensty bulbs, are consistent too, but generate a lot of heat. If you have $200 to spend, you can get a Fiilex lamp, with nearly perfect color and flicker=free performance. My dead last choice would be a flash unit. They are highly sensitive to position when used at close range, and require more setup than I deem necessary. (Rodeo and I can agree to disagree).